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. 006
CONTENTS
Monday, June 2, 2025
House of Commons Debates
Volume 152
No. 006
1st SESSION
45th PARLIAMENT
OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)
Monday, June 2, 2025
Speaker: The Honourable Francis Scarpaleggia
Speech from the Throne
[The Address]
[English]
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply
The House resumed from May 30 consideration of the motion for an address to His Majesty the King in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and of the amendment as amended.
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam.
On behalf of Nipissing—Timiskaming, I would like to offer my support to our fellow citizens of Saskatchewan and Manitoba who have been affected by the forest fires. May rain and calm weather return quickly to the affected communities.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate you on your election as Speaker.
I am very proud to follow in the footsteps of Anthony Rota, who served as the Speaker of the House of Commons from 2019 to 2023. He also served the people of Nipissing—Timiskaming for 17 years.
[English]
Let me start by sharing a bit of information about my riding, which is only four hours west of Ottawa. Nipissing—Timiskaming is made up of many unique communities. As a former mayor of my community, I know that each community deserves a representative who recognizes its distinctive character. I commit before my colleagues today to serving each community and its citizens with attention and discernment.
There are areas of our riding such as Bear Island and Garden Village, which are home to the Nipissing, Temagami, Antoine and Matawa/North Bay Algonquin first nations. It is with honour and respect that I say meegwetch to the original people and affirm my commitment and responsibility to advance the process of reconciliation. It is important to them that the government recognize the rights and contributions of the Anishinabe first nations in all discussions concerning their lands, resources and economic opportunities.
[Translation]
I also want to talk about the francophone population in my riding. Nearly one-third of the residents of Nipissing—Timiskaming have a working knowledge of French and English. During the election campaign, many people spoke to me about the importance of a federal government that will continue to defend the rights, freedoms and prosperity of francophone communities outside Quebec. They also spoke about the importance of protecting institutions that promote francophone culture, such as Radio-Canada.
[English]
That is a snapshot of my riding and its people.
When I met with people, including business owners and organization leaders, in my riding, the issue that came up most often was leadership. That is why, when Mark Carney released the plan entitled “Canada Strong”—
The member cannot use the name of the Prime Minister in the House; they can refer to him only by title. That is a reminder for all new members that we cannot use the names of other members and ministers in the House.
Mr. Speaker, when the plan entitled “Canada Strong” was released, it immediately resonated with the people in my riding, so I congratulate all who developed this plan, which addresses our nation's fundamental need at this critical time: economic prosperity. I would now like to share some of the significant comments I received regarding economic prosperity from three sectors of my riding: mining, agriculture and defence.
The first are comments received from the mining sector. As some may know, northern Ontario accounts for most of Ontario's mining activity, with approximately 200 companies, a third of which are in Nipissing—Timiskaming. Mining is the largest commercial contributor to the GDP of Nipissing—Timiskaming. The riding is a hub for the global mining supply and services sector.
This past weekend, the mining institute of Canada celebrated 100 years of mining in North Bay. From North Bay, companies export and operate around the globe via the city's well-developed transportation network, including highway, rail and air connections. The local industry is known internationally for its innovation, and it collaborates with post-secondary institutions to develop new technologies.
When I met with representatives of these companies, there were three issues that came forward. The first is access to labour. With mining expected to see strong growth in the next few years, what is problematic is that 21% of mining workers in North Bay are over the age of 55 and are nearing retirement. The shortage of housing remains a major barrier to attracting new residents to the region and is why housing projects tied to the North Bay area will continue to need support in this mandate of government.
A second issue is tied to the fact that 65% of local companies will be introducing new products to the market, and they will continue to need strong support for innovation from organizations such as FedNor and the Business Development Bank. The third issue is that 60% of these companies export around the world, and they will continue to need support from Export Development Canada for managing their risks.
Second, I would like to say a few words about agriculture. We sometimes do not think of the north in terms of agriculture, but there are significant opportunities for expansion in the agricultural sector in Nipissing—Timiskaming, in what is known as Little Claybelt: the area of Temiskaming Shores, Earlton and Belle Vallée. In Timiskaming, there are 456 dairy, cattle and crop farms, with an average size of over 500 acres. With the growing days, days that are getting longer, it is predicted that this is an area that will have much opportunity moving forward.
When I met with influencers in that area, they spoke about three things. The first is protecting supply management. They were very thrilled with the words that were included in the Speech from the Throne, as well as with statements made by the new Minister of Agriculture. However, they pointed out the last trade negotiations with the United States, where supply management was supposedly off the table but concessions were nonetheless made at the last minute, so they intend to remain vigilant in the future.
Their second concern is for financing. They need the support of Farm Credit Canada and FedNor. Third, they ask that Highway 11 north be included in the Canada strong plan, as it is an important highway that falls under the plan's provisions for building an east-west trading corridor and twinning the Trans-Canada Highway. As we know, Highway 11 is the main route used for truckers as they travel the country from east to west.
Finally, I will say a few words about defence. People may not recognize that since 1951, the city of North Bay has been home to the Canadian Forces base known as 22 Wing North Bay. It has 500 military personnel who provide surveillance and warning for the aerospace defence industry and work closely with NORAD in Colorado. There are also U.S. military personnel stationed in North Bay.
From a city perspective, there is a strong interest in our base. It has strong ties to our communities. We have an airport with a military-grade runway. Flight schools, a Canadore College aviation campus and Voyageur Aviation Corporation operate out of this facility. There is an increased interest in the impact of the “Canada Strong” plan, which focuses on rebuilding, rearming and reinvesting. The base's facilities need housing improvements.
I will also say a quick word about an issue tied to the CFB but not its daily operations. It is related to a major water contamination problem. PFAS, known as a “forever chemical”, used in the foam for air defence firefighter training until the late 1990s, seeped into the airport grounds and surrounding groundwater. The city and the Department of National Defence have reached a $20-million agreement to clean up the airport. However, and I will conclude on this point, the contamination has also seeped into waterways connected to Trout Lake, which supplies North Bay with drinking water.
In recent months, Health Canada has established that the maximum allowable concentration of PFAS in drinking water is 30 nanograms per litre, while Ontario's 2024 drinking water report indicates that the City of North Bay's drinking water system is the only known system in Ontario that consistently exceeds this limit due to historic PFAS contamination. As a result, additional funding is needed to upgrade North Bay's water treatment plan and to remove PFAS from the water supply. This is urgent.
[Translation]
There are so many other things that I could say with regard to the comments that I heard from my community following the election and with regard to our “Canada Strong” plan. That being said, I am pleased to see that the plan and the Speech from the Throne identify those issues and that meaningful action will be taken to address each one of them.
In closing, I want to reiterate my full support for the throne speech on behalf of the people of Nipissing—Timiskaming. I am happy to take any questions from my colleagues.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, for years, I have been getting up in the chamber and talking about farming in the north, as I actually farm in the north, in your area. It is refreshing to hear somebody else talking about agriculture in the north, because there is a lot of farming happening up there.
As my colleague would know, farmers have to budget, and they have to plan their years. They have to look at their finances. In the House, in the government so far, the Prime Minister has said that we need to have a plan, yet the Prime Minister fails to bring a plan.
Where is the budget? Does my hon. colleague believe that the government should give Canadians what they deserve and have a budget, just like farmers have to budget and plan for their finances?
Before I allow the member for Nipissing—Timiskaming to respond, I will remind her to please do so through the Chair. The member said that they farm in my area. I have no farms.
The member for Nipissing—Timiskaming has the floor.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to visiting my colleague's farming establishment in the Timiskaming area. Certainly it was good to see, as part of the “Canada Strong” plan, that there is a role for the regional development agencies. For us in northern Ontario, under the minister overseeing FedNor, our regional development agency, we are very pleased to see that there is going to be a role also for the Crown corporations that support our territory. In Timiskaming, there is a strong presence by the Farm Credit Canada corporation, and we look forward to a continued role for that organization in our territory.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, let me begin by congratulating you on your appointment.
This is my first speech in this Parliament and I am very proud to be here for a third term.
The question I want to ask my colleague is quite simple. In Laurentides—Labelle, the processing industry and our farmers are facing extremely serious challenges. We know what we need when it comes to supply management. I would therefore like to know how my colleague intends to use her influence within her government to secure supply management as quickly as possible.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent question.
We were all very pleased to see that the “Canada Strong” plan very clearly states that supply management is non-negotiable. Recently, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food also made an excellent comment when he declared that supply management is non-negotiable. We are therefore going to give our dairy industry and all other supply-managed industries our strong support.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. Once again, I would like to congratulate her on her election, her dedication and her community involvement.
My colleague listed several elements of the Speech from the Throne and spoke about several measures that the Prime Minister will be implementing. Can she tell us about this government's priorities, including tax cuts?
Which priority would she like to work on with the Prime Minister to ensure there is progress?
Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question, and my answer may come as a surprise to my colleague. My first priority is to see to it that the projects initiated during the last Parliament and under the leadership of my predecessor, Anthony Rota, are completed. For example, there is the construction of a new $35‑million arena, which has just begun. There is also the $20 million that has been allocated to address contamination. Finally, we have also received funds from the housing accelerator fund, and I want to ensure that there is progress on these projects in our communities.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, one thing I want to touch on is small business. We are not talking enough about the small businesses that are creating jobs right now in our local economies.
We heard in the campaign that there was a call to action from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business asking that we reduce the small business tax rate from 9% to 8%, provide small businesses with additional liquidity to invest in their operations, and also increase the deduction from $500,000 to $700,000.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact that my colleague has pointed out the importance of small business in our country. About 95% of the companies throughout Canada are defined as small businesses, so it is very critical that we bring them all the support that is necessary.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my maiden speech, with profound gratitude to my constituents, my family and my colleagues, and with immense pride as the newly elected member of Parliament for Port Moody—Coquitlam, which includes the villages of Anmore, Belcarra and beautiful B.C.'s coastal communities. Our community spans the ancestral and unceded homelands of the Coast Salish peoples, including the Kwikwetlem, Tsleil-Waututh, Musqueam, Squamish, Katzie, Kwantlen, Kyuquot and Stó:lo nations. I extend my heartfelt gratitude to them for caring for these lands since time immemorial.
Like many in the House, I did not get here alone. My path has been paved by the trust and support of my community, the voters who placed their faith in me for the past 14 years, first as their voice in local government and now as their member of Parliament. They believe in progress and the idea that government can and must be a force for good in their lives. It is their collective voices that guide me here today. It is humbling and energizing all at the same time. The responsibility of it is enormous. This role is not about representing a riding on paper, but about effectively giving voice to people's concerns, their ambitions and their faith in what Canada can become.
All along, I have been inspired by my mom. She is 85 now and was a trailblazer as one of Canada's first female OBGYNs. It was lonely for women in the profession in Calgary in the beginning, where she first practised. That is where some of the very hard times in Alberta were back then for women. A woman had to be a victim of rape or claim mental insanity for the right to choose. Today, more than 50% of those in the profession are women. Mom was very active with the status of women and the creation of the “Shocking Pink Paper” of 1988 to ensure that Canada's daughters were safe from harm in the workplace and had equal rights and equal pay. I have big shoes to fill, but I need all members to stand with me in doing this important work.
I also extend my heartfelt thanks to my family: my husband Gaetan, our kids Isabelle, Vincent, Carola, and Charlotte, and my awesome dad, who is an extraordinary mentor. He is retired as a geophysicist, but he still teaches at the Mount Royal University in the sciences.
I offer my sincerest gratitude to my community back home and my phenomenal campaign team and volunteers, for without them I could not be here today.
Port Moody is a jewel of the Lower Mainland, from the mighty Fraser River in the south to the serene Burrard Inlet in the west, through the towering trees of Anmore and Belcarra. Our region is a meeting place, a city of nature, tradition, innovation and cultures from every corner of the world. Our diversity is our strength. Nearly half of Coquitlam's residents are immigrants, people who came from around the world to build a better life. They bring with them talent, drive and compassion. These values show up in our schools, our businesses, our local arts scene and our community, everywhere. It showcases who we are.
We are also a community of care. Non-profit groups like SHARE Family & Community Services work tirelessly to support families in our community. The Port Moody and Coquitlam foundations support our community as well with their needs and ideas. Our first nation partners continue to teach us what stewardship and respect for the land truly mean.
In 2021, when I was on the Port Moody city council, I co-authored a report calling for meaningful engagement with first nations, support for UNDRIP, the implementation of the five truth and reconciliation recommendations that municipalities have within their power, and of course a blanket exercise for council and staff. It is my hope that every Canadian can participate in and experience a blanket exercise so they can truly understand the devastation of colonialism.
I am encouraged by the recent Speech from the Throne, “Building Canada Strong: A bold, ambitious plan for our future”. It outlines a vision that meets this moment. It does not sugarcoat the challenges ahead but reminds us of what Canada can be if we act with purpose and we act together. We are not here to manage decline; we are here to share and build progress.
The throne speech delivered by His Majesty King Charles III speaks of a country that must not settle for getting by, but one that must invest boldly in building up. It calls for Canada to make sure that no one is left behind, where prosperity is shared and where ambition is matched with action. All this is backed up by a plan in the “Canada Strong” vision that was laid out by our Prime Minister, and as a new MP, I believe in it. It diagnoses what is not working and points to what is possible when the government works together.
The “Canada Strong” plan recognizes what Canadians already know, that affordability is the central issue, and it calls for a transformative approach to housing. This would remove the barriers in building and make sure that people have access to clean and secure housing in a way never seen before.
Innovation is not a trade-off, but a growth strategy. Companies like Moment Energy, based right here in Coquitlam, are already leading the way. By repurposing EV batteries, they are proving that sustainability and entrepreneurship go hand in hand.
The King also speaks to small businesses, like the ones in my community, lining St. Johns and Clarke streets in Port Moody, or Austin Avenue and North Road in Coquitlam. They are not just job creators. These people are dreamers, risk-takers and community builders. The “Canada Strong” plan supports them with targeted tax relief and by reducing red tape so that they can do what they want to: grow, hire and innovate. However, none of this is possible without us working together.
Just as importantly, the plan doubles down on Canada's most enduring advantage: its people. This means continuing to invest in universal, affordable child care. It means tackling systemic inequities in health, education and income, and, yes, it means reconciliation, but not with words alone.
The King's lifelong advocacy on sustainability and climate action has emphasized partnerships among governments, businesses and communities for the very reason that nature is our life support system. It sees young activists as the architects of tomorrow.
During COVID, while I was on city council, I met with a group of grade 4 and 5 students in our school district. They called themselves the “super team”, which stands for “single-use plastic elimination reinforcers”. They shared their concerns about animals, fish and birds that were strangled by plastic or malnourished because their stomachs were full of it. They wanted a ban. They came to Port Moody city council and got unanimous support, then they went to the province, and now we have this ban happening federally. Kids from my community led the way and influenced the legislation. This gave us hope. They give me hope.
Like the King's speech, with themes of unity and service in the spirit of “Canada Strong”, the super team story shows how extraordinary people, especially youth, can drive extraordinary change through collaboration and perseverance. Let us continue this good work together.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my hon. colleague, who was just elected, for being here and for her hard work to get here.
My question is this. How is it that the Liberals talk about the plan to fix these issues? Is it not true that over the last 10 years, it has been the Liberals who have actually created all these problems?
Mr. Speaker, I would certainly beg to differ. I think that the long challenges with housing and safety have been created over many years, and we see this. Rome was not built in a day. We know that the changes to housing and the reduction in a number of housing supports happened years ago, before the Liberals were in government.
We need to look forward. We need to think about the future. We can change this situation, but we need to work together.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank my constituents in La Pointe-de-l'Île for electing me to a fourth term. This is my first speech in this Parliament.
There is nothing in the throne speech about unemployment or workers.
Will there be measures to improve employment insurance? Will there be measures to support workers grappling with the problems caused by Mr. Trump's tariff threats?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, there are many, many supports in the plan. Of course, we know there is significant investment into skills training for young people, for the training but also for employers who bring them on. There is an $8,000 investment into skills training, and there is also $10,000 for the employer to support that good work. There are many supports. Of course, we are always looking to work with members of other parties, to bring our voices and to get this good work done.
Mr. Speaker, what is really quite important to recognize is that the very first announcement of substance that the Prime Minister made was an indication that Canadians are going to get a tax break. It does not matter where one lives in Canada; it is a significant tax break to provide support, literally hundreds of millions of dollars going into the pockets of Canadians because of the Prime Minister's priority of dealing with the issue of affordability.
When I was knocking on doors, Canadians were very concerned about the issue of tax breaks, and we have a Prime Minister who responded quickly to that particular need. I wonder if the member can provide her thoughts in regard to why, from her perspective, it was important and so significant to see the Prime Minister's first initiative to reduce taxes.
Mr. Speaker, this is one of the things that has left me the most excited about our plan, because it is a significant package of cuts and supports for the middle class. It includes reducing the taxes by 1%, which would bring the average family about $850 extra into their pockets per year.
There are many other inclusions, such as dental care. I worked in dentistry for 22 years. Having access to dental care actually supports the health of the whole body. It is a big expense for families, but they can have this care free of charge. It is not just for young people; everyone aged 18 to 64 can have this great support. There is also child care, and there is the reduction of GST on the purchase of a first home, so there are many different supports.
I am very excited, and the people at the doorstep were as well.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague from British Columbia.
The member talked about training and employment readiness, and it is so important. I will give the Liberals credit; the federal government did increase transfers to B.C. from 2016 to 2024, but then it cut them. We are short $74 million now for programs that support organizations like INEO in my riding—
I have to interrupt the member. I have to give the member some time to comment before we resume debate.
The hon. member for Port Moody—Coquitlam.
Mr. Speaker, I understand the member's concerns. We have a new government in place. We know it is going to take time to implement this plan, but I have every faith that it will be an extraordinary plan that Canadians can get behind and that will help unify our country and create supports that did not exist before.
Mr. Speaker, it is the honour of a lifetime to rise for my first speech in this chamber.
As I stand here today within these four walls, surrounded by well over a century of Canadian history, I am all too aware of the awesome responsibility I have been given, and I am humbled to be the first member of Parliament for the newly established riding of Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee.
Many years ago, when I worked here as a young legislative assistant, I promised myself that when I came back to the Hill, I would do so as a member of Parliament, and I promised myself I would model my career after Darrel Stinson, a former member of Parliament and a legend in his own right. Darrel was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer in 2006 and advised to get his affairs in order. He survived that and then some time later went on to beat stage 4 cancer yet again. Darrel will be turning 80 this Thursday, almost two decades later. I wish a happy birthday to Darrel. I can only hope to fill his shoes in this place.
Our riding is a jewel of British Columbia, with towering forests, rolling vineyards, pristine lakes and snow-capped peaks, but it is not just the landscape that makes it exceptional; it is the resources and our people. There is gold in the Monashees, silver in the Slocan Valley, forestry in Lumby and Cherryville, agriculture in the Okanagan and tourism throughout. They are people who work hard, build communities and believe that if government just gets out of the way, they will get the job done.
Our riding is a microcosm of Canada. Canada should be one of the most prosperous nations on earth. We are rich in resources, talent and innovation. However, we are not rich. Our people are struggling. Our natural resources are vast, and our people are willing, but Liberal policies have stifled opportunity, burdened industry and made prosperity feel out of reach for far too many.
Let us call this what it is. It is a government that has lost faith in what built this country: work, resourcefulness and the industries that sustain our towns. Small businesses are struggling not because we lack potential but because we are being held back. I know this first-hand. My own small trucking business cannot move material on bicycles or in electric cars, so the carbon tax simply means I have to charge more and my customers have to pay more. That is the very definition of inflation. The endless seas of paper we have to swim through, the red tape and the crippling taxation make it almost impossible for small business to get ahead.
This Liberal government has made life harder for everyday Canadians. While Mr. Trudeau is gone, the architect of his economic disaster remains on the front bench across the aisle, and the brains behind it have taken his place. In fact, very little has changed, despite the Prime Minister's rhetoric to the contrary. Our last Liberal prime minister told Canadians the budget would balance itself. Now we do not even have a budget.
For the past 10 years, Ottawa has not just been in the way; it has been the problem. In Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, we see the consequences every single day. Forestry, once the backbone of communities like Lumby and Cherryville, has been crippled by indecision and red tape. Sawmills are shuttered. Skilled workers are unemployed, not because the trees are gone but because the political will is gone. In the Monashees, responsible mining projects with strong local support are stalled in endless federal reviews. While the world clamours for critical minerals, we are stuck in neutral.
Many of our residents once worked up north in the oil fields and on our pipelines and then came home for the weekends, because they could live in the beautiful Okanagan, but this Liberal government killed the northern gateway and energy east pipelines and left us at the mercy of the American energy industry and government tariffs.
Tourism operators, whether guiding hikes through forests or running lodges along our lakes, face rising costs, labour shortages and a government more interested in lecturing than listening. Then there is agriculture. Our orchards, wineries, breweries and distilleries are second to none, but if I ask any grower or small producer, they will tell me the same thing: They are being taxed, regulated and carbon-priced out of business. These are family operations, and they have so much potential. They do not ask for subsidies; they ask for fairness.
Instead of unleashing that potential, this Liberal government has spent a decade tying it up with bureaucracy, ideology and economic self-sabotage. This government has consistently treated prosperity like something to apologize for. I, for one, wholeheartedly reject that.
However, I did not come here to dwell in frustration. I came here because I believe in a better way forward. Our Conservative vision is simple: less interference, more opportunity; less punishment, more prosperity; and a government that respects hard work instead of penalizing it.
We believe in unlocking Canada's potential, which means, number one, reviving our forestry sector with clear, science-based regulations and the predictability that companies need to invest long-term; number two, fast-tracking responsible resource projects, particularly those critical to global supply chains and local paycheques; number three, cutting the red tape and tax burdens that are choking small farms, wineries and craft producers; and finally, concentrating revenue on tangible infrastructure, like safe highways, broadband for rural businesses and upgraded safety, not on more giveaways, handouts and social interference.
Most of all, we believe that families, not Ottawa, know what is best for themselves. That means allowing parents to guide their own children and keep more of what they earn, letting small business grow without fear of the next federal penalty and helping communities shape their own future.
The people of Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee did not send me here to manage decline. They sent me here to fight for growth and to restore faith in the promise of this country. This promise is not abstract. It is a father back to work at a reopened sawmill. It is a young entrepreneur opening a craft cidery without drowning in federal paperwork. It is tourists returning to Silver Star and the Shuswap with ease, because the infrastructure keeps up with demand. It is families paddling on a lake or sitting around a campfire, because their town did not become a victim of urban centralization. That is what I stand for, not more Ottawa, not more empty rhetoric. I stand for a Canada that believes in itself again.
Canadians are tired of government that spends more, delivers less and tells them they should feel guilty for wanting to succeed. They are tired of watching opportunity pass them by while their leaders play it safe, hedge their bets and avoid hard truths. As C.S. Lewis wrote, we all want progress, but progress means getting nearer to where one wants to be. If one is on the wrong road, progress means turning around and walking back to the right road. We are on the wrong road. It is time for a new approach. My riding and this country are ready to thrive again.
I stand here today not as a cynic but as a realist with hope: hope that Canada can rise to meet this moment, that we can be a nation where prosperity is earned, not punished; where natural beauty is matched by economic strength; where we are proud of who we are, not apologizing for it. I want to make one thing clear to everyone listening in this chamber and across Canada. I am not here to stoke division for its own sake. I am here to help Canadians pull toward the best possible future, where every resource, every community and every family has the freedom to flourish.
To my Liberal friends in particular, I invite them to set aside economic gaslighting and ideological double-talk and join us in practical steps to restore Canada to its rightful place as a global leader in resource-rich prosperity. When they talk about making us an energy superpower, let us follow it with actions to make it happen and not excuses about why it cannot be done. Empty slogans are not enough. Pipelines are crucial. Work with us to rebuild the forestry sector so the forest workers no longer worry about their next paycheque. Collaborate on intelligent mining reforms that honour both the environment and the people who earn their living from the land. Above all, let us recognize that our differences are far smaller than our shared dreams.
Whether one belongs to a small family restaurant in Lake Country or works for a forestry co-op in Cherryville, and regardless of which party we belong to, every Canadian wants good schools, safe neighbourhoods and a stable community. Every Canadian wants to look their children in the eye and say that tomorrow will be better than today. Let us stop pretending, and let us get to work to make that happen.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome the hon. member to this House.
Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee is a beautiful area. I have had the chance to be there myself. There are lots of good junior A hockey towns as well. I believe Salmon Arm may be close to the member's constituency, if not within it.
The member talked a lot about agriculture, and I think that is important. Representing an agricultural riding, my own home constituency in Atlantic Canada, I certainly know the value of that. I had the opportunity to quickly look at the Conservative platform that the member just ran on, and there is very little mention of agriculture whatsoever. There is nothing on business risk management, nothing on the agri-food sector and nothing on regulatory reform at CFIA or PMRA. Objectively, the Liberal platform was very comprehensive. It was endorsed by a number of major commodity groups.
Will the member opposite commit to being a strong voice to tell his leader, Pierre Poilievre, to actually do more and commit to more in agriculture? It certainly was lacking in the last platform.
Mr. Speaker, the last prime minister used to say that the Liberals were working for the middle class. He used to answer almost every question with that promise. Thanks to the work of the past 10 years, the middle class is on life support today. Middle-class people can barely pay their taxes, and they can barely pay their mortgages. The Liberal government says that it is working to make us an energy superpower. How poor are we going to be if we have 10 more years of that? I shudder to think about it.
Government needs to get out of the way, not stand in the way. If we want to help our farmers, let us remove the industrial gas tax. That is what is hurting farmers right now, more than anything else. They do not want handouts; they want a fair shake.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech and on his election as a member of Parliament.
I listened to the Speech from the Throne last week, and it concerned me. I do not know if my colleague is as concerned as I am, but I am concerned about the government not presenting a budget. I am also concerned that the government seems keen to go full speed ahead on fossil fuels. When the government talks about conventional energy, we know that means fossil fuels. The federal government is talking about bypassing the provinces and their environmental assessments so that it can make all the decisions itself.
Is my colleague not concerned that the government has decided to give up the fight against climate change altogether and go all in on fossil fuels?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, we are all concerned about the environment. We all know that we need to make improvements and work toward a clean energy future. I have no doubt that will happen eventually. What I am more concerned about is pretending that it has already happened and that we have the capacity to do that. We cannot simply run our economy on fairy dust, hopes and dreams, and technology that is not yet deployable, not yet mature.
Reality suggests that we have to use fossil fuels for the foreseeable future while we transition into technologies that we may not even understand at this time.
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. My colleague asked a good question in regard to agriculture. His question highlights the fact that during the last election, Pierre Poilievre made virtually no reference to agriculture. However, the member opposite talked about its importance. We can contrast the Liberal platform to the Conservative platform. The member should maybe reflect on how the Liberal Party outperformed the Conservatives on the agricultural file.
Rather than criticizing the former prime minister, could the member tell his constituents why the Conservative Party of Canada and Pierre Poilievre were outperformed by the Liberal Party and the current Prime Minister in the last election when it came to agriculture?
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member pointed out the exact problem. The Liberals made lots of promises, which he considers “outperforming”. I do not have to deal with the promises. I can look at the last 10 years, since 2015.
If we are talking about performance, performance is action, not promises. The Liberals are famous for making promises and equally famous for breaking them. When the hon. member says the Liberals outperformed the Conservatives, I would suggest that he is—
With that, I will bring questions and comments to a close.
Resuming debate, the member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in this place and speak to the Speech from the Throne. As this is the first time I am rising in this Parliament, I would like to take a moment to express my gratitude to the voters in Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek for once again putting their faith in me to be their representative here in Ottawa. It is truly an honour, one that I take very seriously.
No one gets here on their own, and I want to thank my team and the volunteers who showed up day after day during the campaign. Lastly, I want to thank my husband, Milton, and my entire family, who have stood by me and behind me every step of the way.
I also want to acknowledge all those individuals displaced as a result of the fires in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, as well as all those fighting hard to ensure those communities remain safe.
The people in my riding and, indeed, Saskatchewan, overwhelmingly voted for hope and change. They understood that our country would not thrive under more of the same failed Liberal policies. While the Prime Minister promised change, a different Liberal government and a more serious approach, we are not off to a good start. As it turns out, things are not so different after all, starting with the Prime Minister naming Trudeau's foremost ministers to the most senior roles in his cabinet.
Immediately after their swearing-in, his ministers made statements refuting the various policies he had run on. For example, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture claimed that no pipelines will be built, and the housing minister stated that he intends to make sure housing prices do not come down. It is not a good sign that while Canadians are struggling with affordability and businesses face uncertainty, Liberal ministers want to suppress the country's largest industry and keep young Canadians priced out of the housing market.
Members will remember when the Prime Minister said during the election campaign, “a plan beats no plan.” Canadians were rightly expecting to see that plan put forward in the Speech from the Throne, followed by a budget. However, with the campaign behind him, the Prime Minister announced he is waiting until the fall, pushing off the plan, as well as the accountability that comes through the scrutiny of a government's budget. Instead we are left with a throne speech full of half measures, no budget and main estimates that include more spending than under Trudeau, with an 8% increase.
During the election, the Prime Minister said that despite being an economic adviser to Trudeau, he would be different; he would reorient the government to be more fiscally responsible. The throne speech stated, “In all of its actions, the Government will be guided by a new fiscal discipline: spend less so Canadians can [save] more.” However, no sooner did the promise of fiscal responsibility pass his lips than it is already being broken. Now we see that the spending of the Trudeau years will carry on under the current Prime Minister.
The main estimates were released last week, with the government asking to spend nearly half a trillion dollars in its first spending bill. How can the Liberals keep a straight face in claiming to be fiscally responsible while supporting a spending bill that even outstrips Trudeau’s spending from last year? Within this half-trillion dollar ask, the government has earmarked $26 billion in spending on consultants. That is an 11% increase in spending on those consultants.
In the last Parliament, Conservatives uncovered what the Liberals paid for: consultants who had padded their pockets through double-dipping, fraudulent billing and, at the end of it all, subpar work that could have been done in-house by the public service. Perhaps the additional billions in spending is due to the new list of Liberal insiders that the new Prime Minister brings with him from his previous career.
In the arrive scam scandal, a consulting firm billed tens of millions of dollars to build a simple app but did none of the work, work that some programmers were able to replicate over a weekend. Roughly $60 million is known to have been spent on this app; the number may be even higher, but, because shoddy documentation was kept, the Auditor General could not confirm it, so we will never know.
We also found out that McKinsey, a favourite consulting firm of the Liberals, was given preferential treatment, leading to $100 million in government contracts. The Liberals used a contract vehicle called a national master standing offer, which is usually reserved for vendors who offer a specialized service that government departments need access to. When the Auditor General reviewed these contracts, she found that McKinsey should not have been given special access to the government contracts.
In the throne speech, the Prime Minister also promised to work with indigenous peoples to identify and catalyze projects of national significance. Given the Liberal government's track record on indigenous procurement, I believe this will be another empty promise.
While studying the procurement strategy for indigenous businesses, the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates found that the government was not verifying the indigeneity of businesses. During testimony, indigenous groups and businesses suggested that most of the funding through this program was going to non-indigenous businesses that were posing as indigenous. The Liberals allowed this abuse by ignoring the rules and a lack of indigenous leadership and/or ownership while handing out millions of dollars in contracts. The government was unable to offer any explanation for its failure to ensure that programs meant to benefit indigenous peoples and businesses did so.
Although this study was cut short when the election was called, the issues persist and must be addressed, especially if the government intends to fast-track major projects across the country. This leads us to the promise in the speech to create a “new Major Federal Project Office”.
Imitation is truly the best form of flattery. In 2007, the Harper government created the Major Projects Management Office. The goal of the office at that time was to improve coordination within Canada's regulatory system by providing industry with a single, efficient point of entry into the federal process. It also provided for the integration of Crown consultation requirements with indigenous communities at the beginning of the process. This further demonstrated the Harper government's commitment to consulting with and listening to Canadians, especially those most directly affected by resource development projects, all while upholding Canada's world-class environmental standards. Does this sound familiar?
However, the last 10 years of an antidevelopment Liberal government has made Canada dependent on and vulnerable to the U.S. Without a commitment to scrap the production cap on Canadians, to repeal Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, and to axe the federal industrial carbon tax, this proposal is just another empty promise.
In closing, the promises made in the Speech from the Throne do not line up with Liberals' actions. While promising to enact more fiscal discipline, they are increasing spending. While promising to define a new relationship with the United States, they are dropping retaliatory tariffs and allowing the U.S. to take jobs out of Canada. While promising to make Canada an energy superpower, Liberal ministers insist that pipelines should not be built and that Canada's oil and gas should stay in the ground. While the Prime Minister promised to bring housing costs down, his housing minister intends to keep house prices up, at record highs.
The Liberals are already going back on their word within the first days of this session. Unfortunately for Canadians, the so-called new Liberal government looks a lot like the old one. After 10 years of high spending leading to inflation and an affordability crisis, Canadians want fiscal restraint and a government that will be responsible with their tax dollars.
Canadians can count on Conservatives to fulfill our duty every day to stand up for them, fight for change and restore hope once again.
Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the Conservative spin, which really has not changed. The members opposite like to talk about pipelines as though they actually built any pipelines during Stephen Harper's era that brought our product to the coastlines. They did not build one inch of pipeline. In fact, the only pipeline that we have seen in the last 20 years that brought things to the coast was under former prime minister Justin Trudeau, yet the Conservatives try to give this false impression that they know how to get the job done when they do not.
Would the member opposite not agree that it is time that we put a little of the so-called misinformation that comes from the Conservative Party to the side to focus on Canada and its best interests? Would she not agree that it is time that we have a team Canada approach in dealing with the Trump tariff and trade issue, which is something her constituents are concerned about, as my constituents, and all Canadians, are?
Mr. Speaker, just when the Prime Minister and his caucus would love us to believe that there is a new government, that member stands up to ask a question and proves, as he does over and over again, that it is the same old, tired government we dealt with in the last Parliament.
It should go without saying, and the member would be familiar with this, that I rarely ever agree with anything he says. The past 10 years of Liberal governments have shown that the Liberals are not interested in or serious about making Canada an energy superpower. Despite all their rhetoric, their actions have spoken louder than their words, and we can expect more of the same.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I find it fascinating to watch the Liberals and Conservatives duke it out over which of the two is more pro-oil and which of the two wants pipelines built the most.
My question for my Conservative colleague following her speech is the following. In light of this sort of transformation of the Liberal Party into the Conservative Party 2.0, does she get the impression that she is losing her purpose given that the Liberals are doing the work that the Conservatives want to do themselves?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I absolutely disagree with the premise of the question. What we have here is a government that actually stole many of its ideas from Conservatives. The Liberals say they are going to do these things, yet they have a Speech from the Throne that is ambiguous enough that they will be able to not undertake the things they are promising. They are not bringing forward a budget, so we do not know what their plan is. There is no road map to get us where they say they want to go, and it remains to be seen if they will actually end up getting us there.
Mr. Speaker, congratulations to you on your new role as Deputy Speaker. You and I are fellow Albertans who have been in this place for a long time.
My colleague from Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek gave us quite the list of things Liberals had said that they would do, just for us to find that they were going to do the exact opposite once they were elected. That seems to be pretty much the way the Liberals operate in Canada. They say whatever they need to say, and create whatever state of fear they need to create, to get elected, and then they come to Ottawa to basically renege on all of the promises they made.
In my constituency, there are a lot of hunters, anglers, farmers and ranchers who own firearms. We heard His Majesty the King in the Speech from the Throne talk about respecting law-abiding firearms owners, yet when we take a look at the estimates tabled by the government, we see that it is going to spend four dollars going after law-abiding gun owners for every one dollar it is going to spend going after gangs and criminals.
I am wondering if my colleague would talk about how Liberals seem to say one thing and do the exact opposite, not just on energy, agriculture and firearms, but on basically everything they do.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been in office since March 14 and is now pushing a presentation of a budget for six months. He is pushing it down the road, even though the fall economic update was tabled in December of last year.
This is not leadership; this is abandonment. That is exactly what the Liberal government does. It is long on virtue signalling and short on being virtuous.
Mr. Speaker, you look great in that robe and in your new role. You certainly have worked hard, and it is great to see you there. I send my congratulations to you and to your family. I am sure they are very proud of what you are doing.
I will be sharing my time with the new member for Cardigan following the retirement of the Hon. Lawrence MacAulay. When someone says “Cardigan”, we automatically, after so many years, think about Mr. MacAulay, who did such a great job representing Cardigan. I wish him well in his retirement.
I am honoured to rise for the first time in the House during the 45th Parliament. I also want to thank the constituents of Humber River—Black Creek for re-electing me and asking me to represent them here in the House again. Since I came in during a by-election in 1999, this is, I believe, the 10th time I have had an opportunity to be in the House. It was an honour then, and it continues to be a tremendous honour today. It is an accomplishment, I have to admit. I am not quite sure how I managed all those years, but clearly we did.
I want to thank His Majesty King Charles III for delivering the Speech from the Throne. I will quote from it because I think it captures how we are all feeling today and the direction we want to go. He said:
We must be clear-eyed: the world is a more dangerous and uncertain place than at any point since the Second World War. Canada is facing challenges that are unprecedented in our lifetimes.
Many Canadians are feeling anxious and worried about the drastically changing world around them. Fundamental change is always unsettling. Yet this moment is also an incredible opportunity.
It is an opportunity for each and every one of us who has the privilege of being a member of the House of Commons. His Majesty continued:
An opportunity to think big and to act bigger. An opportunity for Canada to embark on the largest transformation of its economy since the Second World War. A confident Canada, which has welcomed new Canadians, including from some of the most tragic global conflict zones, can seize this opportunity by recognising that all Canadians can give themselves far more than any foreign power on any continent can ever take away. And that by staying true to Canadian values, Canada can build new alliances and a new economy that serves all Canadians.
I think the speech captured very much, in those comments, how Canadians are feeling. They are feeling nervous and anxious. Every time we put the television on, we are never quite sure what our neighbour to the south is going to say.
I think it is imperative that we take the opportunity the leadership from our Prime Minister is clearly giving us. It is an opportunity to participate together and for all of us in the House to work together to make sure that Canadians have the best opportunities possible so that our country can grow to be what we want it to be, but we must work together. Without us working together, we are not going to achieve these things. I continue to ask that we co-operate with each other and that we put Canadians and our country first, no matter what.
Today, of course, I rise with this message to talk about purpose and unity for Canada. Together, we stand at not only a critical time, but also an opportune time. The government is here to renew our commitment to the Canada we are shaping for today and the future, together with all my colleagues in the House.
As a nation, we must continue walking the path of truth and reconciliation. A tremendous amount of work was done under our previous prime minister, and it needs to continue, grounding our future in justice and respect for indigenous people. Canada is proudly multicultural, bilingual and democratic. The riding of Humber River—Black Creek, which I am honoured to represent, is one of the most diverse ridings. Families from every corner of the globe create a community where they build new lives, speak dozens of languages and bring their unique cultures to strengthen Canada and our community.
We will eliminate international trade barriers and launch national infrastructure projects through the one Canadian economy. I wish all the premiers and the Prime Minister tremendous luck and faith today as they move to identify not only those transformational projects that really matter to other parts of Canada but also how we are going to work together to achieve them.
When I first came here almost 25 years ago, I headed a task force. In that task force report, one of the recommendations, and this was in 2001, was to eliminate interprovincial barriers. It was clearly a significant roadblock for the economic well-being of all of our provinces, yet here we are in 2025. Only after the threats from our southern neighbour are we actually trying to remove those interprovincial barriers. I wish all of our premiers well at this particular time as they move forward.
With the new “build Canada homes” initiative, we will increase the affordable housing supply, reduce development costs and promote innovative modular construction. I have received a lot of information on the housing file, as many of my colleagues have. With regard to the prefab homes, there is the ability to put up some of these homes within a month. This is a critical time for us to be looking at how we can change the way we have been doing things and remove the red tape we have all talked about so we can move forward on this.
Canada is a global leader in clean energy, skilled trades and innovation, as well as international relations, security and public safety, which are all critically important themes as we move forward.
To protect our sovereignty, we are reinvesting in the Canadian Armed Forces. Federal investments in the RCMP and national security have to be a priority for the House as we move forward to protect our sovereignty and Canadians. Public safety is not just about policing, though. It is also about prevention, community and trust.
We are strengthening our laws to make bail much more difficult to get for any repeat offenders. We are reforming firearm regulations with stronger red flag laws and yellow flag laws and revoking licenses from those with violent or protective order histories. We have heard far too much about domestic violence happening in our communities, and we have to spend far more time and attention on that issue.
We are going to cap the operating budget growth at under 2% and balance the operating budget within three years. That is a huge goal, one that I believe would be very significant for us to achieve and for all of us to achieve.
We will cut waste. What government does not say that? We will reduce duplication and use technology, though, to improve service delivery across the public sector. It is this new technology that promises the best opportunity for us to do this.
I truly hope that those are not just words. It seems like every government, for the many years that I have been doing this, even at the municipal level, says the same thing. It is really hard to do. It was one of the issues that made me leave the municipal level to come to the federal level, because there was that frustration in trying to reduce waste and cut costs but not having the revenue to do the services we had to do.
Together, we all can build a stronger, safer and a more united Canada.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about all of the ambitious goals and all of the things that her government wants to accomplish. My question is very simple: How does she feel about the fact that there is no budget to present to Canadians with respect to the road map of how to accomplish these great goals?
Mr. Speaker, I welcome my colleague to the House of Commons. I very much look forward to having the time to be able to work with her as we move forward on these very important things.
I do not have a problem with the issue of waiting until the fall to have a budget. There is so much happening at this time. I just wonder how anybody would sit down to really try to do a budget at this particular time. The fall will come, when we will have a much more accurate viewpoint of where we are going with our issues with the south. Hopefully, we will have lifted all of the barriers together with our premiers, and we will be moving forward with a much more accurate budget when it comes out in the fall.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague's speech.
It is no secret that there is a lot missing. Members may already know this, but I am extremely disappointed. We were told that we need to work quickly to reassure people. Here we are with a Speech from the Throne that is missing so much.
I will give an example. We are well aware that people 65 to 74, seniors, are victims of discrimination. In the last Parliament, all the bill needed was royal assent. Not a single day went by in the election campaign without this being brought up to me.
I would like my colleague to tell me where things stand with reducing and increasing what people 65 to 74 need to live.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I welcome my colleague back. I look forward to working with her in the upcoming months and hopefully years.
We all care very much about the issues of seniors and ensuring that they have services and adequate pensions. All of those things are important. If we are able to transform the economy and move forward in the direction we are excited to go in, all Canadians will benefit, including our senior population, which is an important part of Canada and an area that all of us care about.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her re-election. She has had the privilege of being chosen by her constituents to represent them several times now. That is inspiring for new members like me.
She rightly talked about reducing interprovincial trade barriers. That is likely a way to help all Canadians get through the current crisis and deal with the challenges we are facing with our American neighbours.
I would like to ask my colleague how she thinks that eliminating those barriers could have a serious and positive impact on the lives of her constituents and the businesses in her riding.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I am very excited about welcoming another female to the House of Commons. I very much look forward to our working together and advancing the issues we care about.
As to the removal of interprovincial barriers, I remember being in Vancouver and wanting to bring a case of wine with me, wonderful wine, and I was told I could not take it. I could take two bottles of wine, but I could not take that wine properly through the system and ship a box or case of it to Toronto.
That is just one small example of barriers that prevent people in my riding, which the member asked about, who are in the construction trades from going to another part of Canada to work. They very much want to but are not licensed to, so we should eliminate all of those requirements. A licensed construction worker in Toronto should be able to freely work elsewhere, whether in Newfoundland or Saskatchewan. Those barriers have been put up for a variety of reasons and need to be gone so that people have the freedom to go and come as they please.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House today on behalf of the people of Cardigan, Prince Edward Island. I thank them for the trust they placed in me, and I assure them that I am here to work for all my constituents, regardless of who they voted for. I want to take a moment to thank my family: my wife Catherine, my son Alex and all my extended family, who have stepped up and taken over my duties as a dairy farmer of 38 years. They have allowed me this opportunity to pursue a lifelong dream of representing the people of Cardigan.
I would also like to acknowledge and thank my predecessor, the Hon. Lawrence MacAuley, who represented the riding of Cardigan for over 36 years and delayed my lifelong dream. In all seriousness, his hard work and commitment during his years as an MP are visibly evident throughout the riding of Cardigan.
I invite all colleagues of the House to visit Prince Edward Island in support of tourism at home in Canada this year. From our pristine beaches and renowned golf courses to our world-class seafood and rich cultural experiences, P.E.I. offers something for everybody. Our vibrant and resilient communities welcome people to discover the authentic hospitality that makes our island truly unique.
As the representative of Cardigan, I stand grounded in shared values: community, family, hard work and fairness. I stand here today feeling proud and hopeful because the Speech from the Throne delivered last week offers a bold and ambitious yet practical approach to building a strong Canada from coast to coast to coast.
This government's plan responds to the defining challenges of our time with clarity, compassion and informed decision-making. It prioritizes affordability, national unity, clean energy growth, reconciliation, and rural opportunities. It offers the people of Cardigan more than the ability to endure the pace of change, but opportunities to forge and lead through it.
What I hear about most from my constituents is the cost of living, including from young families trying to buy their first home in Montague and seniors living in Morell trying to balance their household budgets with the increased cost of groceries and prescription medicines. That is why I strongly support the government's measures for reducing costs and making life more affordable.
Removing the consumer carbon tax will help our fishers and farmers be more competitive, with lower costs to process and transport their products, and it will benefit all other residents through reductions in fuel prices. Cutting the GST on houses at or under $1 million for first-time homebuyers will result in up to $50,000 in savings. In rural P.E.I., that is a real game-changer.
We are maintaining key programs, such as child care, pharmacare and the new dental care plan, which now helps millions of Canadians, including thousands of people in Cardigan. We are also going to be reducing income taxes for approximately 22 million Canadians. These are practical ways that this government is reducing day-to-day costs for every individual and every family in Canada.
Housing is one of the biggest issues facing young Islanders. Whether it is finding a place to rent or saving for a down payment, the barriers are real, and this government has taken serious action on housing and homes. We will be creating the “build Canada homes” program, a mission-driven approach to fast-tracking affordable builds. We will be investing in prefabricated and modular housing, an area P.E.I. could lead in given our skilled trades base, and we will be cutting municipal development charges for multi-unit housing, making it easier to build homes where they are required.
This is not just a housing program; it is a job and growth creation plan for Canada. As we ramp up homebuilding, we can train and support the next generation of skilled workers in P.E.I. We will work with our educational institutions, like Holland College; our trade unions; and employers across P.E.I. to support Islanders in accessing the training and skills to seize these opportunities.
One of the most exciting parts of the throne speech, which will positively impact all areas of growth, is the drive to create one Canadian economy. Every year, domestic interprovincial trade barriers cost the Canadian economy up to $200 billion, barriers that directly impact opportunities for farmers, fishers and even craft brewers in Cardigan. The plan to remove all remaining federal barriers to internal trade and labour mobility by Canada Day is a major win for P.E.I., and I am hopeful this includes reducing the tolls on the Confederation Bridge and Atlantic Canadian ferries to make all industries in P.E.I. more competitive as we pursue new trade alliances across Canada and throughout the world.
The creation of a major federal project office is expected to cut project approval times from five years to two. For infrastructure projects like a proposed electrical grid for the Atlantic region, for clean energy projects like wind or solar and for support for an energy corridor, this means faster action, more jobs and timely outcomes.
The government's renewed trade agenda also promises to open up export channels for island products, from potatoes to seafood to bioscience innovations. Both a port expansion and a new facility for exporting island goods are being discussed. These could translate into real jobs in community hubs in my riding such as Stratford, Souris, Georgetown and Montague.
I represent a riding built on the backbone of our primary industries: farming and fishing. Our government will be protecting supply management, which is essential to dairy farmers like me and egg and poultry producers. We will be backing our food producers and ensuring us all access to fresh, healthy and local foods. We will be recognizing agriculture as not just an economic driver, but a key part of our national identity. We can also support other initiatives, including community-owned lobster co-ops and sustainable agricultural practices. These actions will give our primary industries a path to sustainability and profitability and thus economic stability.
With climate impacts and market uncertainty, stability in these sectors is vital. We create stability by investing in agri-tech and processing infrastructure. Our government must also continue to fund small craft harbours for the repairs and dredging that are required because of the increasingly severe weather events and reduced winter ice. Without ice cover, shorelines are exposed to water currents throughout the winter, causing silt accumulation in all our harbours.
The impacts from climate change are not abstract for Islanders. We must advocate for programs that reward climate-friendly land use, protect shorelines and fund climate resilience. Our government's plan includes supporting the creation and sustainability of national and urban parks and marine protected areas, and supporting Canada's clean energy transition, where P.E.I. demonstrates leadership. These actions will support local conservation initiatives and clean growth sectors in eastern P.E.I. Our legacy of service and unity lives on today as we face uncertainty together. We must learn from our history to make tomorrow a better place for future generations.
In the spirit of unity, rural P.E.I. has welcomed newcomers for generations. Cardigan's economy depends on the skills of local workers and newcomers. However, with the increased pressure on housing, education, and health services, this government's decision to rebalance immigration streams while also investing in settlement and training support for newcomers is a responsible approach to supporting communities, as our rural industries need continued access to a temporary foreign worker program. We need to ensure that people are treated fairly and that integration pathways lead to long-term community vibrancy.
The throne speech rightly affirms our commitment to indigenous reconciliation, to supporting two official languages and to maintaining culturally focused institutions like CBC/Radio Canada. CBC's presence in the Atlantic ensures our stories, our music and our challenges are heard, and it is vital to rural community connection. In the Cardigan riding, we work closely with the Abegweit First Nation in our continued efforts in reconciliation. The Speech from the Throne commits to advancing reconciliation by doubling the indigenous loan guarantee program to $10 billion, enabling communities to participate in major projects.
At the end of the day, Islanders are pragmatic. We know the value of a dollar, and we expect our government to exercise the same pragmatic approach to spending. The Speech from the Throne sets a strong target of reducing annual government operating spending from 9% to 2%. At the same time, it protects transfers to provinces, individuals and communities. It demands smart investment, not reckless cuts. By reducing duplication and using technology, the government aims to improve services while controlling costs, a philosophy that would resonate in any P.E.I. household.
This Speech from the Throne is more than a federal document. It is a blueprint for how we can strengthen Canada by empowering electoral districts like mine. It acknowledges that places like Cardigan are not peripheral to the nation; we are foundational to it. With action on affordability, housing, jobs, reconciliation and sustainability, this plan reflects the hopes and aspirations of the people I am proud to represent, people who wake up early, work hard and care deeply about their communities.
As a member of Parliament, I will work hard every day to make sure the plan is implemented in a way that reflects our island priorities, that our projects are funded, that our voices are heard and that our future is secured. Let us build a Cardigan where opportunities are everywhere. Let us work together to write the next chapter of—
The member will be able to continue his comments during questions and comments.
The member for Central Newfoundland has the floor.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my colleague, the new member for Cardigan, that the throne speech made no mention of the fishing industry other than the commitment to turn 30% of the ocean into marine parks by 2030. The new Liberal direction with respect to the fishing industry is identical to the direction of the Trudeau era. The Prime Minister is more concerned with meeting United Nations goals and satisfying NGOs than with supporting our fishing industry.
Does the member for Cardigan agree with his leader that it is more important to maintain commitments to the United Nations, or is it more important to support coastal economies like those in his own riding?
Mr. Speaker, in my speech, I talked about creating community co-ops in the lobster fishing industry. The lobster fishermen are experiencing lower prices than normal this year and have to get a steady say in the marketplace. An avenue to do that is to create community co-ops. I will be pursuing efforts with the federal government to fund some of those initiatives. In addition, the reductions in the carbon tax will help with the cost of fuel and other issues in the fishing industry.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the Speech from the Throne announced that the time frames for launching major federal projects would be shortened.
I am very worried about the environment. I am especially worried about one thing in particular. Will the government commit to respecting the findings of the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement regarding oil projects and other such things?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I think the Prime Minister has made it clear there will be only a few named projects that will be fast-tracked. The remainder of the projects will be under the scrutiny of the process we have followed in the past, so there will be a lot of time for feedback and discussion on anything that is going to affect the environment.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his election. Like his predecessor, the Hon. Lawrence MacAulay, he has been as strong advocate for the agriculture sector. As a dairy farmer himself, he understands the importance of supply management for Canadian farmers. While my Bloc Québécois colleagues say that supply management is not being adequately protected, our government has taken concrete steps to support it, and I am sure my colleague can speak to that.
Although the Conservatives cut funding for agricultural science, the Liberal government has reinvested and has rehired scientists to support innovation and growth. The Liberals also continue to invest in the Canadian agricultural partnership, standing firmly with farmers. Could my colleague from Cardigan share how confident he is that the Liberal government will keep promoting and protecting supply management?
Mr. Speaker, I am from the sector of dairy farming, where supply management greatly affects the marketability and profitability of our farms. Our government has been quite clear, and the Minister of Agriculture, a colleague of mine from Prince Edward Island, has been quite clear: Supply management will not be on the bargaining table when we negotiate with our southern neighbours. I am proud of the government's stance on this. The future of farming is going to be climate-smart, tech-driven and farmer-led, and we are here to help, not hinder, the process.
Mr. Speaker, congratulations; you look good there. I also congratulate the new member from P.E.I.
The member mentioned the operating budget. For the sake of our audience, can he define what an operating budget is and what it represents of the general budget, in dollars and in percentage?
Mr. Speaker, it is hard to answer that question in 20 seconds. However, I have managed a dairy business for almost 40 years, so I know how to budget. An operating budget and a fixed budget is the proper way to manage the finances of this nation, just like the way I manage the finances of my business.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and a privilege to stand today for the first time in this historic chamber as the member of Parliament for Vaughan—Woodbridge.
As I am sure was the case for members on all sides, I was in awe when I first took my seat here, a symbol that is at the core of our democracy. The House has echoed with the debates that have shaped our nation, from the early debates around national policy to the conscription crisis of 1917, and from the debates surrounding pipelines in 1956 to the Canadian flag and free trade. I am sure I am not alone in saying that the feeling of awe is instantly met with an understanding of the responsibility that members have to the constituents in the communities they represent.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the residents of Vaughan—Woodbridge for entrusting me to be their representative in the chamber. This seat in the House belongs to them.
Our community is a vibrant riding, where nearly half our residents proudly claim Italian heritage, making our community one of the largest Italian hubs in the nation. Our riding is also made up of growing populations of Vietnamese, Punjabi, Chinese and many others; it is a truly diverse community. From the thriving small businesses on Woodbridge Avenue and Weston Downs to the quiet streets of Islington Woods, and from the growing neighbourhoods of Vellore to the cultural vibrant festivals that light up our summers, Vaughan—Woodbridge is a testament to the enduring Canadian values of faith, family, community and hard work. I am committed to being their champion and giving life to their hopes inside the chamber.
I would like to recognize the most important person in my life, my wife, Maria. Her love and strength hold our family together, raising our beautiful daughters, Abigail and Hanna, and our newborn son, James. As members of the House are well aware, our spouses play a critical role in our work as parliamentarians. They bear an unseen burden of public life, and Maria does so with grace.
I would like to thank my parents, Debbie and Bruno, for their example of always being the adults in the room and for teaching me the importance of responsibility. I would also like to thank my late grandfather Nico for his hard work and persistence, and for teaching me to always be self-reliant. My grandparents immigrated from Treviso, Italy, in the 1950s. They chose Canada, a land of opportunity where one could dare to dream. They worked hard and made this country their own. I am very proud of my Italian heritage.
To every single volunteer of my campaign team, I would like to express my deepest gratitude for their monumental effort and commitment to the principles of our party, a commitment that helped deliver a very decisive victory. Those principles teach us that government's role is not to burden but to enable, yet for nearly a decade, excessive regulation, wasteful spending and punitive taxes have stifled economic opportunity and freedom.
I am guided by the principles of individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government and the rule of law. These principles are not abstract but are the foundation of a society where every Canadian can flourish, free from government overreach and empowered to shape their own destiny.
As a former executive in the steel industry, I have seen first-hand how bureaucracy strangles workers and small businesses. I am here to fight for them, cutting red tape, slashing unfair taxes and making government work for people, not against them. The true role of government is to create the conditions to ignite the spark of the Canadian dream, empowering every Canadian to chase after their aspirations, not stifle them with heavy-handed, centralised control of sectors of our economy and with bureaucratic overreach.
My constituents have been clear: They expect their government to deliver results, not rhetoric. On this front, the Speech from the Throne leaves much to be desired. One of the major issues that is top of mind for my constituents is the increase in crime. Vaughan—Woodbridge is a place where families raise their children, neighbours know each other by name and community pride runs deep. The rising crime, fuelled by the government's soft-on-crime policies, is eroding the sense of security that families in Vaughan—Woodbridge and communities across our very country deserve.
In the throne speech, the government could have easily said that it was going to get serious on crime and address the issue by getting rid of failed legislation like Bill C-5 and Bill C-75. It could have committed to introducing mandatory minimums for serious crimes and prioritizing victims over criminals, but it did not.
In Vaughan—Woodbridge, there have been countless examples of car thefts, home invasions and break-and-enters. Business owners and their staff have been held at gunpoint, and there are women like Sara, whom I met in Sonoma Heights and who told me that her daughter constantly feels uneasy about going out at night alone. Our York Region Police officers do an exceptional job and work tirelessly, but the House must give them the tools to keep criminals behind bars. In fact, we have a moral obligation to do so, for safe communities are the foundation of a strong Canada
A key priority for my constituents is the crippling cost of living facing our country. Whether I am chatting with construction workers, visiting Vici Bakery or Sweet Boutique, or am randomly stopped at a local grocery store like Longo's, the message is the same: Life is too expensive, and people, especially our youth, feel they cannot get ahead.
During the campaign, a 17-year-old at Fortinos approached me. He said that he cannot vote but that his future is in my hands. All he wants to do is get married, buy a home and have a family. This not a radical dream; it is the Canadian promise, yet for far too many young people, it feels like a fantasy. The aspirational ideals of home ownership and raising a family should not invoke feelings of frustration and hopelessness, for they are foundational to the social contract in a great country like Canada.
Our youth are our future, and for far too long they have been ignored. Canada must have their back or we risk continuing our brain drain, where young talent leaves our lands for jurisdictions around the world where their money goes farther and where they can have the type of life they wish to have. We must address this issue with haste or we will all suffer in the long run.
The Speech from the Throne proposes implementing a brand new bureaucracy instead of cutting the red tape that has driven up the cost of homes. Despite a new prime minister and cabinet, the plan mirrors Trudeau's $90-billion housing strategy, which doubled prices over a decade and left young Canadians priced out.
Last week, it was revealed that the Prime Minister had overseen the introduction of half a trillion dollars in new government spending without a formal budget, a move not seen for decades outside the COVID period. This represents an 8% increase in federal spending, with a significant portion allocated to bureaucracy, consultants and contractors.
As parliamentarians, our role is to serve Canadians. The government's proposal for a new housing bureaucracy, coupled with half a trillion dollars in new spending without a formal budget, shifts focus away from the needs of Canadians and towards expanding an already massive government. With the current parliamentary session set to break for the summer in less than three weeks, there is little time left to thoroughly debate and scrutinize each significant proposal, leaving critical issues like housing and fiscal responsibility unresolved.
Canadians deserve better. Conservatives are committed to putting Canadians first and would be willing to sit through the summer to ensure that these matters are properly addressed, prioritizing accountability over a rushed agenda. The time for bold action is now.
I close with the words of John Stuart Mill: “The worth of a state, in the long run, is the worth of the individuals composing it.” Let us build the Canada where Sara's daughter feels safe, where that young man at Fortinos can afford a home and where every family in Vaughan—Woodbridge and across this country can thrive. I am here to fight for them and for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge. As he knows, I have a great deal of respect for him and his journey here. In his remarks, he talked about the increase in our budget and spending. As someone who is from the steel industry, does he not agree with the fact that over 64% of our spending is in the form of capital spending, infrastructure spending, that will use Canadian steel, Canadian wood and Canadian labour?
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his election.
What I found interesting about the proposed spending is that not even 24 hours from the time the Liberals said spending would be capped at 2%, it has already inflated to 8%. I just question the fact that the government argues it is going to be different, yet what we see is more of the same.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my Conservative colleague about his speech.
He was talking about economic and fiscal issues. We know that one of the first things this government did when it came to the House was to say that it would lower taxes. Then the government increased spending and asked for more money to run its operations.
No budget has been tabled. We do not know when it will happen, but it seems that it will not be before the summer. What does my colleague think about the government requesting more spending money when it is proposing tax cuts without presenting a budget and without knowing where we are going?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, that was an interesting question. Of course, when Canadians look at their budgets for their own households, they realize they have to scrutinize each and every cost item. They have to craft and propose a budget. I always wonder why the government feels it does not have to do the same.
Absolutely, if the government wants to increase spending by half a trillion dollars or, rather, wants to add half a trillion dollars' worth of spending, it should definitely put forward a budget. It is unacceptable for the government not to do so.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his successful campaign. We just celebrated, in Vaughan yesterday, a large Italian festival.
One thing I am sure my colleague will agree with is that our parents and grandparents taught us to live by a budget and to understand that we cannot make a dollar and spend $1,000, yet the government refuses to present this House with a budget.
How can we proceed without knowing what the end result will be?
Mr. Speaker, to my colleague, the member for King—Vaughan, we had a fantastic day in Vaughan celebrating the beginning of Italian Heritage Month yesterday with its first-ever Italian festival. Congratulations to the mayor of Vaughan and the city of Vaughan for putting on such a fantastic event.
To my colleague's question, if we want to take the matters of the public treasury seriously, if we want to get serious about budgeting and serious about improving the lives of Canadians, the government must put forward a budget at its earliest convenience, that is, in this parliamentary session. The later it delays, the more things get out of hand, the worse off it will be, the higher the cost of living prices will become and the more out of control it will get.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure members opposite will become very familiar with a program called build Canada homes. Think in terms of Canadian technology, Canadian lumber and Canadian labour, not to mention the benefits that the consumer will ultimately have. By contrast, when the member spoke about housing, he did not seem to realize that Pierre Poilievre, his leader, is a former minister of housing who had six houses built during his tenure.
Why should the Liberal Party give any credibility to Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives when it comes to housing?
Mr. Speaker, members will recall that during the election campaign, Pierre Poilievre talked about how to create the conditions to unleash the housing sector, rather than about adding layers of government bureaucracy that would only exemplify the issue.
Our plan would be to help municipalities create the conditions for development, not add more layers of government bureaucracy.
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to the people in my hometown of Kitchener South—Hespeler who gave me this opportunity to make a maiden speech today in Canada's House of Commons. May I never forget that this is their seat, and may I faithfully serve them so long as they see fit to keep me in it.
There is no chance I could stand before you today without the love and support of my wife, Simone. She is a brilliant physician and scientist who has now given me the greatest possible gifts: our children, Penelope and Felix. Six months before this election, she nearly died delivering Felix to us. She spent a couple of days in the ICU on life support and today is at home in Hespeler being just the best mom in the world to our two kids. I should be at home with them. They are the best part of my life.
Also, it has been a pleasure and an honour to be a physician serving my community for the last 13 years. When I went door knocking, I knocked on thousands of doors, and one of the most common questions I received was a question I asked myself: Why the heck am I doing this? Why would I go into politics? Do I not like being a doctor and do we not need doctors? The answer is yes, I like being a doctor, and yes, we need doctors, but to fully explain why I had to do this will take about 10 minutes. It has to do with who I am and what Kitchener is, so here I go.
My family's story is typical in Kitchener. My dad's family came to the region when it was still called Berlin, Ontario. They came from present-day Germany before it was called Germany. One hundred years later, when war with Germany broke out, my Grandpa Strauss, like so many other Kitchener Germans, enlisted with the Scots Fusiliers because one's last name and mother tongue were not of much matter when it was time to stand on guard for our true north, strong and free. We only have a Canada today because Canadians from all over the world put Canada first in this way. They staked their lives for Canadian values, which are enshrined in our anthem as truth, strength and freedom.
Conversely, my mom came as a Romanian refugee from Communist Yugoslavia in the 1960s. When my dad was away with the air force, we would speak Romanian in the house. I grew up hearing from my grandparents, in that language, that they were poor back home, but I had no idea how poor until about 10 years ago, when I travelled with my grandfather to his tiny village, now on the border between Serbia and Romania. Fully half of the homes there were boarded up. It was overrun by stray dogs and weeds. We went to the house my mom was born in. It had two rooms and dirt floors and was about 400 square feet. There was a bedroom with four beds in it and a kitchen with two beds in it. Nine people slept in those six beds. As I stood in what I am sorry to call a shack, the enormity of what Canada had given my family hit me like a ton of bricks.
My grandfather is one of the smartest, hardest-working people I have ever met. When he came to Canada, he spoke zero English, had a grade 6 education and had two small daughters with him. After six months of working in a factory for $1.09 an hour, he was able to buy a five-bedroom house in downtown Kitchener for $20,000. That house is now worth $1 million. I do not have to say that that opportunity no longer exists in our country today.
My 28-year-old brother-in-law recently graduated from the University of Waterloo in mechatronics engineering. He has no hope of buying that house on his engineer's salary. Where did that opportunity go? I do believe that my grandfather has the answer to that question. He had to do three years of military service in Yugoslavia, and he always told me he loved the army life. It did not strike me until a couple of years ago to sit down and ask him, if he loved the army so much, why did he go back to farming in the village? He said, “Because, Matthew, you cannot get promoted unless you join the party”, which was the Communist Party. I said, “Well, you were an ambitious man, Grandfather. Why didn't you join the party?” He replied, “Because, Matthew, if you are in the party and they say this is black”, pointing to the white tablecloth, “then you have to say it is black, even though it is white.”
English is my grandfather's fifth language. I promise he has never read George Orwell's 1984, but this is exactly the “two plus two equals five” scene. I think about this scene a lot when I am told that men can get pregnant. When the truth becomes illegal, everything breaks. If one cannot say what is wrong with the tractor or the levee or the hospital or the passport office, one can never fix it, and it will stay broken. Not willing to give up speaking the truth, my grandfather went back to the village. After a few years, though, the farms were all socialized, and eventually the starvation got so bad that they had to make a break for it.
I have stories of our health care system in universities going back 13 years ago and all the way up to last fall, when my bleeding, postpartum wife spent six hours cradling a two-day-old baby in the emergency room while not being seen by a physician. When I told the triage nurse I was going to take my wife to another hospital in the next town over, he said, “That would be great. Thank you. There is no place for her here.” If people go to one of our ERs and are treated like cattle, like my wife was at that time, they have no recourse. They would be really delighted if people took their business elsewhere.
When farming is socialized, we get bread lines, and people died of starvation while standing in Soviet bread lines. When health care is socialized, we get lines in the ER, and I promise that people have died and are dying in waiting rooms and emergency rooms across this country right now.
One may think that I am being overwrought and seeing the ghost of communism where it does not exist. However, I would note that we just spent 10 years with a prime minister who, when asked which government in the world he most admired, stated it was the basic dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party; a prime minister who released a statement lionizing brutal communist dictator Fidel Castro when he died; a prime minister whose answer to every social problem, dental care, child care, pharmacare, school lunch, climate change, etc., was always more socialism, more central planning, more top-down pronouncements and less freedom to make choices for ourselves and our families.
The zenith of all this top-down control came during the pandemic. The members opposite went full communism. They locked Canadians down in their homes. They ruined weddings, funerals, Easters, proms and Christmases. They closed the borders. They kept mothers from children and brothers from sisters. They deprived this House of its ancient rights, spent $600 billion of taxpayer money with no budget and doubled our national debt to pay healthy 16-year-olds to sit in their basements. Then, as now, they did all of this in the name of crisis management.
Physicians, professors and journalists who spoke out against these abuses were hunted down. They had their licences and their jobs threatened. I know this because it happened to me at Queen's University, where I taught. Jane Philpott herself, one of the only two cabinet ministers to speak truth to Justin Trudeau's power, informed me in her dean's office that the reason the administration had to harass me was that I “criticized the government”. That is a direct quote.
Of course, Prime Minister Trudeau and his commissars were immune from all of this. He could attend gatherings of greater than five if it suited his political purposes, like a George Floyd protest in Ottawa, and he did. The Liberals claimed unto themselves the power to censor the news, to violate free speech in the name of fighting misinformation, while they promoted misinformation. They gave luxurious contracts to their friends in academia to promote their misinformation and gave hundreds of millions of dollars to mainstream media to promote government narratives. These three institutions, government, media and the academy, have important roles in society to regulate each other. However, under the federal government's bribery scheme, they have ended up, like the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker out to sea, stewing in each other's bathwater.
When ordinary, everyday Canadians came here to Ottawa complaining that their charter rights to bodily autonomy, assembly and free movement were being violated, every member of the Liberal caucus voted to trample their rights further. They violated section 2 and section 8 of the charter in imposing the Emergencies Act. It is not me saying that, but Justice Mosley of the federal court. They trampled on the charter rights they claimed to revere, and then they laughed about it. The current Minister of Transport, in particular, laughed about it.
If we cannot speak truth to the Liberals' power, everything will continue to break. That is why I had to come here; I refuse to be a cog in their broken machine. I hope it is the case that this darkness left with the former prime minister, and I beseech the new Prime Minister to turn to the light, to defend those values enshrined in our anthem: truth, strength and freedom. I read his book. It is called Values, and freedom, I am sorry to say, is not among those therein discussed.
The repackaging of the Liberals' socialist plans in banker socks might fool some of the people some of the time, but it is not fooling the multicultural communities in Kitchener South—Hespeler. The Romanians, Albanians, Polish, Ukrainians, Serbians, Croatians, Lithuanians, Venezuelans, Chinese, Somalis and Ethiopians with lived experience of socialism, and who know what they are seeing, do not like it and sent me here. They came here for freedom, and not just any freedom but our specific, embodied Canadian freedoms.
These freedoms are ours, but they are not merely ours, and they are certainly not ours to discard. They were fought for at Runnymede and encoded in the Magna Carta. They were fought for in the English Civil Wars and the Glorious Revolution and enshrined in the Declaration of Rights. They were fought for in the world wars and enacted in Diefenbaker's Bill of Rights. They were fought for by both my grandfathers, by all of our grandparents, and embodied in all of us here.
The answer to the question of why I came here is that I am here to speak truth to power on behalf of the people of Kitchener South—Hespeler. I will be happy to go back to being a physician and professor once I can practise in truth and freedom again and once we can all live in truth and freedom again. May God keep our land glorious and free.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member opposite for demonstrating so fully why the Liberal Party was re-elected as government for Canada.
Canadians are reasonable people. They believe in facts, science and a government that seeks to make their lives better. With regret, what I heard there was a great deal of nonsense. Talking about health care, I am not sure whether the member should have run for provincial parliament rather than the federal Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, it is a common misapprehension that the federal government has no role to play in health care. Of course it does. The Canada Health Act is a federal document. The Public Health Agency of Canada is, of course, a federal agency. When we see similar problems from Victoria to St. John's, Newfoundland, it tends to be the case that there is a single explanation under it all, and in this case it is indeed the federal government.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for Kitchener South—Hespeler. There are a lot of new members in this place, and I wish to welcome everyone and wish them good luck in their work here on behalf of their constituents.
I do want to ask the hon. member if his position is that our health care system should be abolished and that the Canada Health Act should be repealed, representing socialism.
I actually think that Canadians and our social democracy have done a wonderful job of combining free enterprise and a system that works for all Canadians with the best elements of being concerned with the greatest good for the greatest number and not allowing market forces to drive up the cost of health care. The U.S. health care system, for example, delivers higher costs and worse results in health care.
Mr. Speaker, this would take more than 30 seconds to discuss. The worst health care system in the OECD is, in fact, the American health care system. I am sorry to say that the Canadian health care system is a close second. If we look at France, Germany, South Korea, Japan and New Zealand, all across the world other developed nations are able to blend the free market and public insurance, which I favour, in ways that are more appropriate than in our system.
Mr. Speaker, a lot of the things that the hon. member was relaying are things that I heard throughout the campaign, particularly from those who grew up in eastern European countries, where they saw the rise of socialism, the incremental loss of rights and freedoms, media propaganda, Internet controls, what we can see and say online, and then, eventually, the confiscation of firearms from law-abiding people. What I heard in my riding sounds very similar to the arguments that he heard in his riding. I am just wondering if he could comment a little bit more on that.
Mr. Speaker, absolutely, I heard such things. My best friend's dad is from Czechoslovakia. He escaped during the Prague Spring. He told us that he felt bad for us, that he never experienced anything under the Soviet Union like he did under the Liberal government during the pandemic. Those are his words, not mine. Likewise, while I was door knocking in my community, I met a Romanian woman who was literally packing her bags to go back to Romania because of these infringements on her basic freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying that you look good in the chair. I look forward to working with you.
It is an honour and a privilege to represent the good people of the riding of Waterloo. I want to welcome my colleague, and friend, I hope, who is also representing Waterloo region.
Today, we are dealing with an amendment to the Speech from the Throne. I do believe that the speech was really well received. When we talk about our families and where people come from, I would like to hear from the member whether he foresees anything in the speech that was not a good vision for Canada. Does he believe that we can achieve that vision for Canada, and does he believe that, regardless of party stripe, we will be able to work together?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by assuring the member for Waterloo that I consider her a friend. She is my parents' representative in the House now, as they have moved up to Waterloo, and she does a good job at it.
I listened to the throne speech. I read the throne speech. I found it platitudinous. The goals that are in there are great, but I saw no details on how to get there. Most of all, there is no budget.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères.
I would like to use my time to review the Speech from the Throne. I will not hide the fact that the Bloc Québécois is extremely concerned about the direction the Liberals are taking. They have literally abandoned the fight against climate change, when they should be doing so much more. During the election campaign, the Liberals confirmed that they planned to abandon much of the previous government's climate action plan. They abandoned consumer carbon pricing without replacing it with anything. Even the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said that it was a very bad idea to axe this tax.
The government also sent out $3.7 billion worth of vote-buying cheques to all Canadians, except Quebeckers, despite the fact that Quebeckers had paid $800 million as compensation for abolishing a carbon tax. The tax no longer existed, but the government still wanted to compensate for it.
On top of that are the oil and gas pipeline projects. The previous government had promised to eliminate oil and gas subsidies, but now the Liberals will not say a word about it. I would remind the House that $30 billion in subsidies was paid to the oil and gas industry in 2024, for a total of $75 billion over five years.
The Liberals also floated the idea of eliminating the emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, the most polluting sector in the country. They also proposed to weaken environmental assessments to make it easier to get pipelines approved. That was before the election. Since the election, the frenzy of environmentally irresponsible behaviour on the part of both the Liberals and the Conservatives has continued.
Right now, severe wildfires are burning in Manitoba. There are close to 70 fires, and thousands of people have been evacuated. The government seems to be brushing that aside in favour of the development and continued expansion of Canada's oil and gas sector.
The throne speech also mentions that there are major challenges with regard to climate change that are generating uncertainties across the continents. Let me stress the phrase “climate change”, because that is the only reference to climate change in the throne speech. Simply put, climate change has disappeared from Mr. Carney's narrative.
To solve the climate crisis—
I remind the member that he is not allowed to name the Prime Minister. Members must be referred to by their titles.
The member from Repentigny.
Mr. Speaker, I blame my inexperience. I will not make this mistake again. Please forgive me.
To solve the climate crisis, the government is proposing to fast-track what it calls “projects of national significance”, projects that are in the national interest. It is announcing these projects now, but without naming them. However, everyone knows full well that the government is talking about things like pipelines, oil and gas.
According to the Speech from the Throne, removing barriers will enable Canada to build an industrial strategy that will make it a “leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy”. Conventional energy, as we now know, refers to oil and gas. This approach is totally inconsistent with the fight against climate change.
As we saw during the election, the government wants to keep supporting the growth of oil extraction from the oil sands, oil in general, gas, and pipelines. We see right through the government's game. This very day, before the Prime Minister met with the provincial premiers, he sat down with oil and gas CEOs and Danielle Smith, the Premier of Alberta.
Canada is the fourth-largest producer of oil and gas worldwide. It already is an energy superpower. Let us be clear, right now, we are experiencing the devastating effects of wildfires. They should remind us that it is not in the national interest to exacerbate the climate crisis and build new oil and gas pipelines. What we need to do instead is get away from fossil fuel energy as fast as possible.
This government is doing the exact opposite. It wants to reduce approval times for major federal projects from five years to two by creating a major federal project office. Of course, we expect environmental assessments to suffer. What will this office's role be in relation to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada's role? It seems to us that, from now on, projects will be approved before they are assessed.
The government wants to create an energy corridor free from regulatory obstacles by watering down environmental assessment rules in order to make projects happen faster. The environment and the environmental and territorial sovereignty of Quebec and the provinces could end up paying the price. The Bloc Québécois believes that it is essential that all major infrastructure projects, especially oil and gas projects, undergo a complete and thorough environmental assessment and that they be approved by Quebec and the provinces. Obviously, we will not allow the government to build a pipeline through Quebec.
The government's current attitude to the fight against climate change is completely irresponsible. It claims that these projects are for the common good, but I would remind members that it has not even assessed them yet. The government needs to understand that there is no fast lane to social acceptability. The government needs to take the time to conduct free and informed consultations. To do that, it needs to carry out a proper environmental impact assessment to identify the projects' environmental, social and economic impacts, as well as any climate impacts. Before it can establish that a project is in the national interest, it needs to assess its climate impact. Obviously, all of this needs to be done in collaboration with indigenous people, the provinces and affected communities.
Now we keep hearing about the “one project, one review” approach. We in the Bloc Québécois called on the federal government to stop duplicating Quebec's environmental assessments, as it did for GNL Québec's Énergie Saguenay project, when Ottawa continued its assessment after Quebec had rejected the project.
Of course the federal government must fulfill its responsibilities, but only in the very specific areas under its purview, as defined by the Impact Assessment Act, and when projects fall under federal jurisdiction. It must not interfere in areas of provincial jurisdiction.
When the government says it wants to adopt a “one project, one review” approach, we have to wonder how it plans to achieve that goal, because Quebec has very clear laws. Any pipeline more than two kilometres long is subject to Quebec's environmental assessment process and must be assessed by Quebec's Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement, or BAPE. That is one review already. We are wondering how the federal government will manage to achieve “one review“ if Quebec is already responsible for doing it.
As for protecting the land, the government reiterated its commitment to protecting 30% of the land and seas by 2030. If Ottawa wants to be taken seriously, however, it must immediately stop encouraging the development of offshore drilling, which threatens marine biodiversity. The Prime Minister recently supported a call for bids for offshore oil exploration licences covering 85,000 square kilometres off the coast of Newfoundland. Ottawa seems to think this move to expand fossil fuel development somehow fits into the fight against the climate crisis, yet some of these licences actually encroach on a marine biodiversity protection zone.
If the federal government wants to help protect land that does not belong to it, it should try increasing the money it transfers under the Canada-Quebec nature agreement from $100 million to $300 million, as the Bloc Québécois suggested in its 2025 platform.
The government cannot claim that a project is in the national interest if the public has not been consulted and voiced an opinion. What does it take for a project to be in the national interest? Why should a major oil and gas project be prioritized over projects with far broader benefits, such as large-scale electricity, green energy and public transportation development projects?
The money that the federal government is probably going to invest in the oil and gas industry could instead be used to develop, consolidate and strengthen public transportation assets and services, such as the Quebec City tramway, Montreal's blue line, trains to the Gaspé or intercity networks. These projects need considerable support, and they are truly in the national interest and would help meet the challenges of the 21st century. In its platform, the Bloc Québécois proposed making public transportation a priority.
When the government talks about a pipeline to the east to diversify markets, it is not unreasonable to ask what markets it is talking about, since no European countries have offered to purchase the oil, which would not be available for years in any case. The market for oil is shrinking anyway.
Obviously, we are in favour of developing green energy, energy efficiency, public transportation, transportation electrification, energy sobriety and green buildings. We are not in favour of using public funds to develop fossil fuel energy, pipelines, oil sands or natural gas.
What we are proposing is a vision. We hope that the government will strive to regain its credibility, because, unfortunately, when it comes to the fight against climate change, it is not at all credible. Right now, wildfires are raging across Canada and people are being evacuated from their homes. We are asking the government to be responsible. The Bloc Québécois will stand firm to make sure that the government finally takes the climate crisis seriously.
Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate my colleagues from all parties on being elected or re-elected. Second, since this is my first time rising in the House, I would like to thank my constituents in Trois-Rivières for placing their trust in me. This is the first time in 45 years that a federal Liberal MP has been elected in Trois-Rivières. It is a privilege to represent my constituents from Trois-Rivières here in the House. I hope we can all work together.
In the most recent election, Quebeckers and Canadians were very clear. They told us what they expected from this government, and that includes the government making life more affordable. That is why the first measure that we introduced was a $22-million tax cut for Canadians and Quebeckers.
Does my colleague think it is a good idea to put more money in the pockets of people in Repentigny?
Mr. Speaker, what I know for certain is that the people of Repentigny are having money taken directly out their pockets, partly due to the increase in extreme climate events, and they are not the only ones. The Insurance Bureau of Canada said that last year set a record in terms of the financial impact of weather conditions across Canada, including flooding. That affects the cost of groceries and the cost of health care. It affects everything.
The Bloc Québécois absolutely agrees that the government needs to get serious about fighting climate change and ensure that people stop paying for the consequences of oil- and gas-related climate events.
That said, we have been clear about how important it is for the government to present a budget before increasing its already exorbitant spending while keeping us all in the dark. If the government wants to present a budget, we will evaluate its proposals. For now, we feel that it is being fiscally irresponsible.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, one of the axioms we have in the industry is that we always measure future behaviour by past performance. We have not been able to develop our energy infrastructure from coast to coast to coast, and there is a lack of corridors and pipelines. I wonder if the member could comment on how we will be able to develop our energy infrastructure from coast to coast to coast.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, when we look at what the largest international agencies, including the International Energy Agency, are proposing in terms of net-zero emissions, it is very clear that governments around the world are being irresponsible. They are continuing to increase their investments in oil and gas and approve more of these projects around the world, but we need to take the fight against climate change seriously if we want to uphold the agreements, including the Paris climate agreement.
For the Bloc Québécois, the issue is not about whether there are enough oil and gas or pipelines in Canada. We already have plenty of those. In fact, Canada currently produces twice as much oil as it consumes. Oil and gas pipeline projects that pass through Quebec have already been rejected because there was no social licence for them and because, according to governments, these projects threaten the global energy transition and biodiversity.
We would like the official opposition to tell us what they would do to fight climate change and what they are proposing in terms of projects and transition measures to support workers. Hiding our heads in the sand and extracting more oil and gas is not in the best interests of workers and—
Mr. Speaker, we are speaking out against this inconsistent approach, because the Bloc Québécois is concerned with more than just preparing for the next election.
Lobbyists are exerting pressure and the economy needs to stay afloat. In the meantime, however, the planet is burning. My colleague just mentioned that climate change is being brushed aside.
I would like to ask him a question: Is it not time we asked ourselves how much climate change is costing us, rather than continuing to subsidize certain industries in the name of the economy?
Mr. Speaker, it seems that the only vision being put forward in Canada is to eliminate carbon pricing. However, if the government eliminates carbon pricing, the entire population will have to bear the costs associated with the impacts of climate change, oil and gas.
The Bloc Québécois believes that industries should bear the costs of climate change, because if large emitters and polluters do not pay, the bill will be passed on to citizens. We are talking about major economic, social, environmental and health costs. The government must take responsibility.
Mr. Speaker, before I officially begin my speech, I want to thank the voters of Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères for putting their trust in me for a fourth time in this election. It is a great privilege that I do not take lightly. I will do my best to do right by the people of Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères.
Since today's debate is on the Speech from the Throne and since my leader gave me the monarchy file, that is what I will be focusing on today.
In the most recent election, many Quebeckers chose to hold their noses and vote Liberal. What was the first thing that this government did the day after the election to thank Quebeckers? The government had a great surprise for us. It invited the King to come. When I saw that, I thought it was ridiculous, that the government was laughing at us, thumbing its nose at us, that something was happening that was not right. However, no, this was serious and not just a joke.
We know that the Acadians were deported because they refused to swear allegiance to the King. We know that after the conquest, an oath of allegiance was forced on the newly conquered people, requiring them to renounce their Catholic faith in exchange for the right to hold public office. We know that in 1837-38, the Patriotes were hanged in the name of the monarchy. However, after all that, Quebeckers have been told to be Canadians and to vote for Canada. Now that the election is over, do they feel like throwing a big party paid for with their taxes, attending a royal parade and inviting Charles III? Had that been the Liberal message during the recent election, I have a feeling that there would have been fewer Liberal members.
There is no hiding the fact that the King is the living embodiment of old colonial oppression. The Prime Minister decided to invite the King because, for him, royal power is not just an insignificant old relic. It means something to him and he sees it as important. One does not extend a royal invitation on a whim.
Nations are built on symbols, which are a way of expressing who they are. The decision to invite the King was a way of embracing this dreaded symbol that Quebeckers reject, of reminding them of it, and of rubbing it in their faces. However, it was starting to fade from memory, since it had been half a century since a monarch was in Parliament. Back when I was in university, I took a constitutional law course where I was taught that if a power goes for too long without being used, it gathers dust, and eventually that power starts to smell musty and it becomes obsolete. It is like an old car parked at the back of the driveway that is starting to rust. At some point, it cannot be driven anymore and has to be scrapped. This is pretty much the same thing.
In fact, a kind of break happened recently. I say “recently”, but it was before I was born, which, in terms of all of Canada's history, could mean recently. As everyone knows, the Constitution was repatriated in 1982. Incidentally, Quebec never agreed to it, but that is another story. What exactly happened at the time? The Queen brought the Constitution over from London, saying that it was no longer her responsibility, but ours. She surrendered it to us, in a sense, because it has not been revisited ever since.
Now, thanks to the Liberals, we have gone back 100 years. Journalists asked the Prime Minister why he invited the King. He was a bit surprised by the question and did not understand why he was being asked that, because it seemed quite obvious to him. He replied that he saw it as a symbol of our sovereignty from the United States. The question then becomes exactly whose sovereignty are we talking about, because it is not our sovereignty. It is the sovereign's.
I do not think that having a foreign monarch come here is a sign of sovereignty. It is more like a sign of subservience and submission. The proof is in the order in which they walked when the King arrived. That said it all. First came the King. Next came the Governor General, and then the Prime Minister. The more legitimate people are, the further back they go.
It was the same for members of Parliament. When the King arrived in the Senate and sat on his throne, the unelected senators sat comfortably at their desks, while members of Parliament, who are elected by the people, stood at the entrance.
It is shameful. We are not in the middle ages. Given that, the government said that we needed to send a message to President Trump. The message sent by the government to President Trump is more or less that Canada cannot be his subject because it is already someone else's subject. Canada already belongs to someone else: the King of England. What is next? Are we going to replace the flag with the Union Jack or replace the national anthem with God Save the King, while we are at it?
In fact, it is rather incredible that 150 years after it was founded, Canada is still a country that is incapable of existing on its own. It absolutely needs to revive its old colonial connection to justify its existence. Do we really want to be butlers, a sub-country? I believe that Canada also has the right to evolve at some point.
We are told that we had to invite the King because we wanted to prove that we are different from the United States. If having a King is the only difference between Canada and the United States, then we have a problem. They must really be desperate. In fact, this really says a lot about English Canada's identity crisis. They are incapable of standing up on their own. If we need the King to prop us up, then we are on shaky ground. In Quebec, we are not going to ask Emmanuel Macron to come and help define who we are. We know that we are Quebeckers. We know who we are.
We then heard the member for Saint‑Maurice—Champlain say that it was a great day for Canada, that the entire world was watching with great excitement. The Bedouins in the Sahara were watching with bated breath. In the trenches of Ukraine, the fighting stopped because they had to watch the King's speech. Prayers were interrupted at the Vatican, in Jerusalem, in Mecca. I mean, come on. Aside from the U.K., who is interested in some old man reading a speech written by someone else? I would say pretty much no one. It is completely ridiculous. When they say "the world", they mean the U.K. That is pretty much the only place where people would have taken an interest in the throne speech. This is clear proof of an anglocentric view of the world. To them, the world is the Anglosphere. They think that the world revolves around them.
The invitation to the King was, above all, a concrete example of the old English Canadian loyalist tradition. English Canada was founded by loyalists who left the United States after it gained independence 250 years ago. They did not want to be part of a republic, a sovereign country. They decided to flee to Canada, where there was still a king. Afterwards, they tried to make us disappear by any means possible. It became a country of Orangemen. The Durham Report was implemented, the Métis were brutally repressed, Louis Riel was hanged and French was banned in every Canadian province. The reality is that Canada is a country built on our exclusion and marginalization. That is the reality. Now Canada is telling us that it has not changed, that the same royalists are still around.
The royal romanticism we see today is celebrated like a sort of nostalgia for the loyalist Canada of the good old days. Surely members can understand why I am not really interested in partying with them. I do not understand why they cannot grasp why Quebec is not joining them and why we are not celebrating everything I just described alongside everyone else. These are actually horrors.
I have a suggestion for them. They can have their monarchy party. They can have their fun. They can spend as much of their tax money as they want on crowns and trinkets, but they need to do it on their turf. What we are going to do is build our country on our turf. That is my suggestion, which I hope will meet with strong support in the House. I think that is the solution to the current conflict.
Mr. Speaker, what we are witnessing today is a lack of respect for Quebeckers.
The member opposite just called Quebeckers "fearful" and "cowardly". He said that Quebeckers held their noses before voting Liberal. That is deeply disrespectful of Liberals. I do not know if I can demand an apology from my colleague on behalf of the Liberals. Quebeckers are not cowards. Quebeckers have been voting for years. Quebeckers chose a Liberal government that they can count on.
I would ask my colleague opposite to respect the choice made by Quebeckers. The Bloc Québécois must stop calling Quebeckers "fearful" and "cowardly".
Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that members of the House listen again to what I said and reread what I wrote to see whether I used the words “fearful or “cowardly”. I do not believe that they will find them anywhere in my speech.
However, what I did say is that a large number of Quebeckers held their noses and voted Liberal, and many of them made no secret about it. When I was knocking on doors, I heard people say that they were, just this once, going to get behind what the Liberals were proposing in order to take on Trump because there was a fear campaign.
However, after that, the first thing that the government did was not to defend Canada. It invited a foreign monarch to read the Speech from the Throne in order to show that we are not really sovereign, that it is not the people who decide, and that we are still in a monarchy. That is a tremendous insult to Quebeckers since 87% of them reject the monarchy.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, first, I want to congratulate my colleague on his re-election.
We heard the Bloc talk about climate today, and it is great to hear members of Parliament talk about it because it was not talked about enough in the Speech from the Throne. Does my colleague believe that when it comes to Canada and Quebec, nation building is climate action?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, my colleague asks a very good question.
Upon reading the Speech from the Throne, we see that the issue of climate change is nowhere to be found. It is as if it no longer exists, as if there is no more pollution or tar sands, and as if climate change went away and everything is fine.
I find the Liberals' conversion into Conservatives on this mind-boggling and unbelievable. It is as though the Liberal Party decided to put on a Conservative mask, cater to the oil companies and forget that there are forest fires across the country. I find that completely irresponsible. Unfortunately, that seems to be the vision on the other side of the House, and I hope that this will change.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his re-election.
I listened very carefully to his speech, which I found to be divisive. However, what I heard during the election campaign was a desire to be more united than ever and to feel close to our fellow Canadians as Quebeckers in order to present a united front against the division sown by the United States. The deeply sovereignist talk from my colleague is not what I heard when knocking on doors.
I am a proud Quebecker, born and raised in the Eastern Townships. I went to school in Saguenay. I have lived in the Eastern Townships for almost my entire life. I come from Quebec's regions. I am a proud Quebecker. I ran for the Liberal Party because I believe in its values, in the rule of law, in fairness and in democracy. Like me, 44 of my Quebec colleagues were elected as members of the Liberal Party, twice as many as for the Bloc Québécois.
Does my colleague recognize that I am a proud Quebec Liberal and I, too, was elected to represent Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about unity.
That is very interesting, because those who want unity act accordingly and reach out. Instead, what this government decided to do was invite the British monarch, who is rejected by nine out of ten Quebeckers. I find that mind-boggling. Had the Liberals proposed that during the election campaign and 44 Liberal members were elected, then perhaps it would be acceptable, since it would be the decision of Quebeckers.
However, what we are seeing here is Quebeckers being divided. Unfortunately, that is what this government is doing. It seems as though we are being...
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I am sincerely grateful to the people of York Centre, to my supporters and to my colleagues. This is an honour of a lifetime. I thank them so much.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I rise in the House for my inaugural address with humility to share my unique story in the hope that I do not go back to the future.
I clearly remember the Communist Soviet Union. I lived there until I was nine. Those of us who come from the eastern bloc are afraid. Please, do not dismiss us.
I will begin by asking a question: How many bedrooms are in members' home? Are there more bedrooms than people? Why? It is because we have a housing crisis. Why do people need so many bedrooms? “How many bedrooms?” is the precise question the Red Army asked my great-grandmother after the Bolsheviks barged into my family's home in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1918. It turned out my family had too much house, so the Bolsheviks settled in two more families. That was the hell that were communal apartments in eastern Europe.
We already have a vacant house tax in Toronto. Some folks in Vancouver are talking about a vacant bedroom tax, and we are already asked how many bedrooms we have on the national census. Let me draw a scenario. An article in The Globe and Mail claimed that there is no version of reality where housing supply can meet the rising demand. After the Prime Minister's “build Canada homes” fails, because we cannot trust the government with our dry cleaning, imagine what is going to happen when people have no place to live and the federal government declares housing a national emergency. We all have to do our part. People who own large homes should do their fair share. Why do they need all these extra bedrooms? Why not redistribute housing?
I am not saying this will happen, but who knows anymore? My fear is the new phenomenon we are seeing in Canada called collectivism. It is accelerating, and it is exactly the path that Venezuela and so many other countries took, slowly, step by step.
Everything is the biggest crisis ever now. We have a new crisis every week. The problem is that at a time of crisis, even when collectivism is well intentioned, it is just a step away from Communism. There are no limits to where collectivism will go, because the bigger the crisis, the bigger the government's solution, especially from the Liberals. They are determined to save us from everything. They will fit a square into a circle, even if they break the toy. Of course, mainstream media will applaud and tell us that it is working. Then, all of a sudden, we do not recognize our country.
Do members know what else? In the Soviet Union, people were not allowed to listen to foreign radio like the BBC or the Voice of America. They were not allowed to read western newspapers or books. They could not even pass around photos of supermarkets, so Soviets would not start asking why people have eggs in Europe but Soviets do not. That is why people called it the Iron Curtain.
The Prime Minister talks about there being too much disinformation out there on U.S. platforms. What is he going to do? Is the Prime Minister going to censor Twitter? Is he going to put me behind the Iron Curtain again? Freedom of speech is the greatest right of them all, because through freedom of speech, we defend all other rights and all other people. However, freedom of speech is not just the right to utter speech; it is also the freedom to hear speech. When the Prime Minister threatens my ability to read Twitter, I am worried. Am I going back to the future again, like the Beatles song Back in the U.S.S.R.?
It does not matter how people voted; they do not want censorship in Canada. It is not up to the heritage minister, who calls himself a proud socialist, to decide what is true and what is not true and what is safe and what is not safe. The Liberals, like all radicals, think they know what is good for us. That is the difference between Liberals and Conservatives: Liberals want to tell people what to do; Conservatives say, “You do you.” In fact, communists use the word “disinformation” to come down on free speech. I say to just have the decency to call it lies. They can accuse me of lying. I dare them to.
The best way to combat lies is not censorship, but more information and better information. Throughout history, those who impose censorship are always the bad guys. Unless speech violates the Criminal Code, let Canadians hear all opinions and make up their own minds. That is democracy. The Communists also lied very well. They lie about everything. My grade 1 gym teacher said, “You don't need herring on your bread. Bread and butter is good enough. Maybe they have herring in America, but that is because America didn't fight in World War II.” What a terrible lie. Germany even lost World War II, but they have herring in Germany.
Ironically, the Prime Minister also has difficulties getting his facts straight. He says one thing in English and another thing in French, one thing out west and another thing in Quebec. He had nothing to do with Brookfield's move to New York. He just signed the letter to the shareholders.
Now the Prime Minister refuses to table a budget, because he plans to rewrite the books: New books, everybody. He will override well-established public sector accounting principles. He will take out capital dollars because they are not real dollars: We do not pay interest on them and we do not add them to the debt. Abracadabra and boom, Canada's operational budget will balance itself.
I started out as a commercial and bankruptcy litigator. The first thing to be asked when entering a distressed company is “Show me the books”. When the books are hocus-pocus, we can bet there is malfeasance. When we hear about a company doing a big accounting revision, the stock is dumped. Separating capital and operational expenditures never worked. It has been tried, and it failed.
The Prime Minister should be honest about his government's failure and fess up to the gazillion-shmuzzillion dollar deficit. He should not cook Canada's books because, mark my words, it will undermine confidence in our country and it will bankrupt our nation. Please, do not cook Canada's books.
After the Soviet Union, I lived in Israel until age 15. I lived in the Holy Land during the first intifada. Now I apologize, colleagues, but this is important. When a Hamas terrorist assembles a suicide vest, they pack it with as many nails as possible, and this is true, so when the suicide vest goes off, it blinds as many people as possible and cuts as many limbs as possible. I watched Tel Aviv bus No. 5 blow up on TV every other week. That was the first intifada.
Now they chant “Viva viva intifada” in my riding in north Toronto. I am back to the future, again. I am here to alert my fellow Canadians and everyone in this room, beware of the intifada, beware of jihad coming to Canada. There is no Zionist occupation in Syria, but more than a million people were killed in a civil war. In Yemen, in the last decade, almost half a million people were murdered. In Rwanda and Sudan, millions of Muslims were murdered, with no Zionists in sight. An offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood is murdering Black Muslims in Sudan right now. It is a real genocide, and not a word from the Liberals. That is why many Muslims come to Canada, to escape jihad, to escape that hell.
It is shameful that the word “intifada” is now chanted in Canada, even though I am a free speech guy. Jihad is incitement to violence and it is dangerous. Beware of jihad picking up steam in Canada. That is the historical perspective I bring to this Parliament.
Wait, I have another historical perspective. It is Canada. I am exhibit A for the Canadian promise. We landed at Pearson when I was 15, on September 5, 1995. We came directly to Sheppard and Bathurst in the heart of York Centre. I remember it like it was yesterday. It was in the middle of the night. I looked out the window and I saw Earl Bales Park. Across the park, on the other side, I saw Yonge Street lights and towers. It was beautiful. I was in love from day one.
We did not have a cent to our name. I remember what true poverty was like. My father sold ice cream on those yellow bicycles. My mother was an unemployed teacher, but Canada has given me every opportunity to study, to work and to succeed, because all one ever needed to do to succeed in Canada was work hard and be nice to people. That is it. Now I am elected to the House of Commons by the same community that welcomed me as an immigrant.
Dreams come true, but not in this Canada. Before the Liberals, dreams came true all the time for many Canadians. Now a quarter of Canadians cannot afford food. It is shameful. That is why I am here, and that is why our Conservative team is here to help Pierre Poilievre—
Mr. Speaker, the member for York Centre and I have known each other for quite a while, and I want to congratulate him on his victory.
He talked a lot about the Jewish community. As we know, Eglinton—Lawrence has a large and vibrant community. Does the hon. member support this government's plan to bring in security zone and bubble zone legislation?
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased with my municipal counterpart for introducing that legislation. We will see if it survives charter scrutiny.
What I do not appreciate is that the Liberal government, in 2017, repealed a Stephen Harper law, Bill C-51, that made it illegal and contrary to the Criminal Code to promote terrorism. The Liberals repealed the provision that would help to address many of the things we are seeing right now on the streets of Toronto and across the nation. Promoting terrorism should not be lawful on Canada's streets.
Mr. Speaker, Canada was not always like this. The Liberals across the way want us to think that we just happened to get here, but it has been a decade of Liberal failures that have brought many of the things that this member has talked about.
I am just wondering if the hon. member has any more comments he would like to add to that effect.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying in my remarks, all one had to do to succeed in Canada was work hard and be nice to people, and if one did that, they would be assured a pretty good standard of living, but after 10 years of the Liberal government, a quarter of Canadians are worried about affording food. Over two million people are using the food bank. It is shameful.
That is why we were elected. That is why we are here, to help Pierre Poilievre restore the Canadian promise that no matter where people come from, they can afford food and live in a safe neighbourhood. It does not matter where we are from; dreams do come true, because Canada is the best country in the world.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the cost of living and economic issues. I would like to know where my hon. colleague stands on the $3.7 billion in election goodies that the Liberal government handed out in the middle of an election campaign at a cost of $800 million to Quebeckers, even though Quebeckers never received any cheques. The compensation was paid out after the carbon rebate was scrapped.
Does my hon. colleague agree that Quebeckers should get back the $800 million it cost them when the government sent cheques out across Canada?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I agree that all Canadians should get back as much of their own money as possible. Right now, the Liberal government is offering a $240 tax cut, roughly, per person. That is $20 a month. That is nothing. It is breadcrumbs. The finance minister stands in the House every day and says that 22 million Canadians are going to be getting a $20 tax cut. Of course, Conservatives support all tax cuts, but we urge the government to do more, because all across Canada, including in Quebec, Canadians cannot afford this government anymore. We need more tax relief for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, judging from that speech, I guess it explains the member's position and why Pierre Poilievre actually called community housing and co-op housing “Soviet-style” housing. I get that, because, according to the member's speech, he seems to be alleging that anything to do with supporting the community on the whole is communism.
The member says he supports tax cuts, so let me ask him a question. The craft brewery community and distilleries are hit with an unfair excise tax. In fact, it is one that should be changed. My question for the member is this: Would he support changing the excise tax, the tax rate, so that Canadian domestic craft brewers and distillers would not have to pay the same rate as the two largest foreign-owned businesses here in Canada operating in the industry?
Mr. Speaker, I will always support all tax cuts, as I am sure all of my friends will on this side of the House. Shame on the Liberal government for actually increasing the alcohol tax during the worst crisis of affordability in our nation's history. Conservatives and myself are in favour of all tax cuts, and I would not exclude the excise tax as well.
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be standing here today to give my first-ever speech as a member of Parliament. Let me first start off by thanking the incredible people of my riding of North Island—Powell River. I am here first and foremost because of the trust they have placed in me to be their voice and their elected representative in this esteemed chamber. This is something for which I will always be grateful and which I will never forget.
It has been almost two years now since I first decided to seek the Conservative Party nomination and run in the last election. It was a decision I made because I believed then, as I do now, that this country was headed in the wrong direction, that it was failing to live up to its true potential and that it was sleepwalking toward a fiscal and cultural cliff. I think there is no better example of that than the fiscal mismanagement we have seen of our country.
When I worked at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, I used to tour a debt clock right across the country. It showed how much the federal government had borrowed and how much debt it was leaving to future generations to pay for. It was a great tool to help people visualize just how much we were leaving the next generation to pay for. That particular debt clock no longer exists, because under the Liberals and the NDP, we have managed to borrow more money in the last 10 years than all other governments in the history of this country combined, and we literally ran out of digits on the clock.
Of course, all this spending, borrowing and printing of money has other consequences as well. We have seen the highest inflation in more than 30 years, as everything, especially homes, has become less affordable. There used to be a promise here in Canada: If people worked hard, paid their taxes and followed the law, they could afford a place to live.
When my grandfather, who is now 94 years old, first came to Canada in 1957 as a refugee, he, like most new Canadians, started off with a minimum-wage job working on the railway. On that minimum-wage job, he was able to afford a home and a nice piece of property right on Vancouver Island and have it paid off in less than 10 years. Does anyone think one could afford a home and have it paid off in less than 10 years while earning minimum wage anywhere in Canada today? I do not think so.
This is the result of too much government, too much regulation and too much bureaucracy. It is time to remove the gatekeepers and start building things in this country again. This also means supporting our incredible resource sector and resource sector workers, who have been under constant attack from the Liberals and the NDP.
On the North Island, where I live, forestry is down by a third; aquaculture has been cut in half; fishermen have had their access barred to areas they have fished sustainably for more than a hundred years; and the last mine on Vancouver Island closed as well. On energy, the Liberal record is even worse: axing the northern gateway pipeline, telling our allies in Korea, Germany and Greece that there is no business case for Canadian LNG, and introducing legislation like Bill C-69, which killed dozens of massive energy and resource projects and led to tens of billions of dollars in investment fleeing to the United States, and for what? Was it just so these jobs can leave our country, for China, for India, for the U.S., for countries with lower environmental standards than our own? These are Canadian workers who have had their livelihoods, their ability to put food on the table to feed their families, sacrificed by the Liberals and the NDP on the altar of this green ideology. Here is the truth: No one does safety and environmental stewardship better than Canada or better than Canadians, and as long as the world needs lumber, minerals, or oil and natural gas, as much of it as possible should come from right here in Canada.
We also have to rebuild our military. We have our amazing men and women in uniform flying combat aircraft that are more than 40 years old, to say nothing of the state of our submarines. Our men and women in uniform, as amazing as they are, find a way to make it work; they really do. However, it should not be up to them to become the world's experts in using old, rusted-out equipment. They deserve better than that.
There is maybe no issue where the Liberals and the NDP have done more damage, from a human perspective, than their mismanagement of the addictions crisis. First, they decriminalized hard drugs, including fentanyl, crystal meth and crack cocaine, and then they used taxpayer money to flood the streets with a highly addictive and deadly opioid called hydromorphone, or Dilaudid, while marketing it to our young people as safe supply. This is all part of their plan known as harm reduction.
As a result, since 2015, more than 50,000 Canadians have died from drug overdoses. That is more Canadians dead than those who died in the entire Second World War. That does not sound much like harm reduction to me. They say the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing while expecting a different result, so how about instead of handing out free drugs, we get our fellow Canadians into treatment, get them into recovery and return them to being healthy, productive members of our society again?
At the same time, we need to repeal the soft-on-crime Liberal legislation, like Bill C-75 and Bill C-5, that has reduced jail time for serious offenders and granted near automatic bail for career criminals. In fact, it seems the only people who are ever punished for anything anymore under the Liberals and the NDP are those who actually work for a living and follow the law, whether it is our law-abiding firearms owners, who have been targeted and demonized by their own government; small business owners, who have been taxed and regulated to the point of insolvency; or resource workers, who have had their jobs threatened, their careers denigrated and, in some cases, their livelihoods destroyed.
Right now, in Canada in so many ways, it feels as if right side up is upside down and common sense no longer exists. That brings me to the cultural erosion that we have seen, the tearing down of statues, the erasing of our history.
I was in Victoria the day this corrosive ideology all began, when they toppled the monument to the man who built this country, without whom Canada would not even exist. The truth is that this country has so much to celebrate and so much to be proud of. We owe an infinite debt of gratitude to all those who came before us, like the prime ministers, both Liberal and Conservative, whose portraits are hanging just outside these chamber walls. They laid the foundation for what would become and for what still is the greatest country in the world. They laid the foundation by being bold, by being daring and by getting things done.
In the late 1800s, Canada was a small country divided by language and religion and surrounded by a larger and much more powerful neighbour to the south, yet in that historical context, we completed what many consider to be this country's greatest engineering and political feat: the Canadian Pacific Railway. Championed by Prime Minister Sir John A. Macdonald, most do not know that the bulk of the work took just four years to complete through some of the most difficult and expansive terrain in the world, across the Canadian Shield and through the Canadian Rockies. It was the key to bringing my province, British Columbia, into Confederation.
Can members imagine, in the current political, regulatory and cultural climate of today, if we tried as a nation to undertake a similar feat? Instead of championing these kinds of nation-building projects, the government today seems to be actively plotting against them, but it does not have to be this way. Macdonald dreamed big, Sir Wilfrid Laurier dreamed big as well and we can dream big once again.
The truth is that the silver lining to this problem lies in its solution. We do not need the government to step up in any particular way. We just need the government to get out of the way and give this country back to those who built it, the people. That begins where this country draws its greatest sources of strength: the wealth of its resources and the ingenuity of its citizens. I intend to do my part to always be a voice for the hard-working citizens of my riding in this incredible country, to always be unapologetically proud to be Canadian and to always be guided, no matter what, by what is true and what is right, not by what is politically correct.
Mr. Speaker, many of my colleagues and I have been able to witness that the far right is alive and well in the Conservative Party and Pierre Poilievre today.
Could the member share with the House his honest reflections about what residential schools were about?
Mr. Speaker, the member across the way is continuing the proud Liberal tradition of spreading misinformation. I have never denied anything about the horrors that occurred in residential schools. The Liberals are just trying to distract from their horrible record on the economy, of doubling the national debt and of increasing violent crime by more than 50% over the past 10 years, leaving this country weaker and more vulnerable to intimidation and tariffs from the United States.
Statements by Members
[Statements by Members]
[English]
Harsimrat Randhawa
Mr. Speaker, today I rise with deep sorrow to honour Harsimrat Randhawa, a bright, kind and ambitious 21-year-old Mohawk College student from India. On April 17, 2025, Harsimrat's life was tragically cut short by a senseless act of violence. She was an innocent bystander taken from us while waiting for a bus on her way to work.
In our grief, our community came together to mourn, to support one another and to remember Harsimrat. That strength in community reflects the very core of what Canada stands for.
As a father, I can only begin to imagine the grief that her family is enduring, and the heartbreak of sending their child across the world to pursue her dreams, only to receive the devastating news that she had been killed. Harsimrat's story is a stark reminder that public safety must be a priority.
Harsimrat Randhawa was loved and will be remembered.
Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise as the representative for Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, a new riding for the 45th Parliament. I first wish to thank the voters, the volunteers and their families who placed their trust in me.
Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies is a diverse riding, stretching from the great continental divide at the B.C.-Alberta border, through the Shuswap Highland to the ranching grasslands of Kamloops. It includes Craigellachie, where the last spike of the Canadian Pacific Railway was driven to unite Canada. It is home to three national parks and spans the headwater tributaries of the massive Columbia and Fraser rivers.
However, it is the people of this majestic riding that make it truly spectacular: the agriculturalists and artisans, the mountaineers and miners, the railroaders and retirees, all of the people of the Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies who hold this seat in the House. I pledge to do my best to ensure they are well represented.
[Translation]
Riding of Les Pays-d'en-Haut
Mr. Speaker, in my first speech in the House, I would like to talk about the wonderful history of Les Pays-d'en-Haut.
I stand before the House as the first member of Parliament in the history of that riding, which makes me very proud. I have this incredible privilege thanks to the hard work of my wife Julie, my children Emma and William, my entire team of volunteers and the people of this beautiful riding.
Les Pays-d'en-Haut is a riding made up of mountains, lakes and trails that I pledge to defend and promote.
I would be remiss if I did not mention the people of Morin-Heights, who put their trust in me as mayor for the past 16 years. I am certain that my involvement in politics will result in the defence of all of the constituents of the riding of Les Pays-d'en-Haut.
[English]
Niagara West
Mr. Speaker, this is my first time rising in the House of Commons after a hard-fought election. I wholeheartedly thank the constituents of Niagara West for putting their trust in me for the eighth consecutive time. However, I could not have done any of this without the hard work and dedication of our excellent campaign team, who got the job done.
We had dozens of extraordinary volunteers. I thank them for all the work they did on our campaign. Rain or shine, cold or hot, they never gave up, even on those chilly, windy days courtesy of our Great Lake, Lake Ontario. I thank the sign crews, door knockers and many others. It is the best team in Canada. I will always remember and appreciate it.
I would also like to thank my friends and family, my kids and my staff. However, my biggest thanks goes to my wife Rebecca. She is an amazing woman, and I can assure members that she has lots of patience. I thank Rebecca for standing as a team as we once again take this journey together.
It is now time to get back to our hard work. Canadians need us in these challenging times. Conservatives are here to work tirelessly on their behalf, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
[Translation]
45th Parliament
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the people of Bourassa for entrusting me with the honour of representing them here in the House of Commons. It is an immense honour.
I also have a message for my colleagues. Despite our differences, we all share the same commitment to serve the public with the integrity, attention and humility that the voice of our constituents calls for. Together, let us make this Parliament a time for progress, respect and hope for all Canadians. We are here to be agents of change, no matter the challenges. Every word that has been spoken or will be spoken here can change lives.
I will conclude by sharing with my colleagues a quote by Nelson Mandela, who said, “It always seems impossible until it's done”. Let us make this Parliament a time to work together—
[English]
Wildfires in Saskatchewan
Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would like to thank the residents of the riding of Prince Albert for re-electing me as their member of Parliament.
As members of the House are aware, my home province of Saskatchewan is experiencing one of the worst starts to the wildfire season on record. More than half a million hectares have been burned, and as of Sunday afternoon, 20 communities remained under evacuation orders. Fifteen active wildfires are forcing residents from communities such as Timber Bay, Hall Lake and Pelican Narrows to flee their homes.
Premier Scott Moe recently spoke about the value of developing a national investment strategy, one where critical resources, such as air tankers, can be owned by the country and shared across jurisdictions to meet the surge capacity when and where needed. It is about protecting our communities, our forests and our future.
I thank the firefighters and emergency personnel, who are putting themselves at great risk to protect our communities.
Please, let us all pray for rain.
World Milk Day
Mr. Speaker, having spent most of my life as a dairy farmer in eastern Prince Edward Island, I would like to take this opportunity to raise a glass to all the dairy farmers across this nation.
As members may know, World Milk Day was June 1. It is a day celebrated around the world. It highlights the nutritional value of milk and recognizes the hard work of our dairy farmers, the women and men who work so hard every day to provide safe and nutritious milk to Canadians.
With over 9,000 Canadian dairy farms, the dairy sector supports over 270,000 full-time jobs in communities in every province across this country. A healthy, vibrant dairy sector brings stability to both rural and urban communities while supporting the vitality of its related industries.
I am proud to be a Canadian dairy farmer, to be the son of a dairy farmer and the father of another. To use a phrase coined by the members opposite, I come from boots, not suits.
Opioids
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' throne speech was 2,500 words, yet there was not one mention of the opioid crisis or the unprecedented crime wave caused by their policies.
Last week in my hometown of Williams Lake, the city council passed a motion to declare a state of emergency in response to the rising rates of vandalism, open drug use, arson, theft, overdose and public indecency. Businesses cannot even secure the mandatory insurance, because of the high rates of vandalism. Meanwhile, the city is experiencing between 20 and 30 overdoses per day.
City councillor Scott Nelson said the rates of crime, vandalism, drugs and overdoses have “skyrocketed” and are “out of control.” He said, “In Williams Lake, a population of 10,000, six prolific offenders commit over 98% of the crime. When they are in jail, the crime rate goes down; when they are out, it skyrockets. The new government must finally take the fentanyl crisis seriously, get tough on crime, lock up repeat offenders and keep our communities safe.”
[Translation]
275th Anniversary of Saint-Antoine
Mr. Speaker, in 1724, François, Jacques, Jean and Pierre Archambault, four brothers under the age of 20, settled in New France on the banks of the Richelieu River, on land that was then part of the seigneury of Contrecœur. Other families joined them, and in 1750, the community was large enough to get its own church. After the deportation in 1755, the community became home to many refugees, who settled in what is now known as the Rang de l'Acadie.
On November 23, 1837, reinforcements from Saint-Antoine helped secure a Patriotes victory in Saint-Denis. One of those reinforcements was Georges-Étienne Cartier, who later switched allegiances. To this day, Saint-Antoine retains both its character and its history. When my ancestor, François Guertin, cleared his land 300 years ago, he could hardly have imagined one of his descendants rising in Parliament to mark the 275th anniversary of his village, one of the most beautiful villages on earth.
I wish all the people of Saint-Antoine a happy 275th anniversary.
[English]
Humber River—Black Creek
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured, as are my colleagues, to rise in the House for the 45th Parliament and to thank the constituents of Humber River—Black Creek for giving me the great opportunity and privilege of representing them for the 10th time here in Ottawa.
I want to thank my tireless husband, Sam, and my children, Cathy, Deanna and Sam, for their continued support. I give a special thanks to my son-in-law, Graziano, for his immense support during the election; daughter-in-law, Claudia; and the grandchildren.
I also thank my staff, Amy, Albert, Abby, Stephanie and Xania, for their dedication to helping the residents of Humber River—Black Creek every day.
I would not have been elected and re-elected without the tireless efforts of many volunteers during the campaign, to name a few: Terryl, Chris, Juan, Marina, Chris, Dave, Miss Emma and Marianne. There are many more I would like to acknowledge; however, unfortunately, my time is limited.
I will continue to honour my oath to serve our community of Humber River—Black Creek with dedication and integrity as we work together to build a better Canada.
Finance
Mr. Speaker, last week the Liberal government tabled a $486-billion spending bill. The Prime Minister promised during the election that he would govern Canada with a new fiscal discipline. It seems as though we have a case of meet the new boss, just the same as the old boss.
While many people in northern Ontario struggle to make ends meet with the ever-increasing costs of everyday life, the Liberals do not get it. They seem to talk a good game of fiscal restraint, but talk is cheap, unlike the cost of living. The Prime Minister's first bill would do nothing to ease the burden of skyrocketing mortgage payments, groceries and energy. Instead, it would increase government spending by 8%, including a 36% increase for consultants.
When will the Liberals put the interests of everyday Canadians ahead of their well-connected insiders in Ottawa?
Scarborough—Agincourt
Mr. Speaker, I thank the people of Scarborough—Agincourt for placing their trust in me a fourth time. Much appreciation and gratitude go to the many volunteers and supporters, the campaign team and my family, who all worked so hard to allow me to continue to be a voice in Ottawa and also in the riding. I am here for them and because of them.
I want to welcome all the new constituents who have joined Scarborough—Agincourt because of the federal electoral boundary changes. I will focus on affordability, tariff concerns and community safety, which is what I heard about at the doors. We are truly a vibrant community, which is reflected in our many places of worship, small businesses and excellent restaurants.
I am so very proud to represent one of the most culturally diverse ridings in Canada.
Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has repeatedly refused to be transparent about his financial holdings. Instead of coming clean about his financial interests, he dumped his assets into a blind trust, exposing a loophole in Canada's financial disclosure laws. Through this scheme, he is keeping his financial interests a secret from Canadians in order to escape accountability. This follows a pattern of shady actions.
Prior to becoming Prime Minister, he helped two multi-billion dollar funds in offshore tax havens so his company, Brookfield, could avoid paying Canadian taxes. After a spending bill asking for half a trillion dollars has been tabled, Canadians deserve to know whether the Prime Minister is using that spending to boost his own investment portfolio.
The Prime Minister must tell Canadians what assets he held when he entered public office and whether those assets were held in offshore tax havens to avoid paying Canadian taxes.
[Translation]
Rivière-des-Mille-Îles
Mr. Speaker, I very humbly accept this second term that my constituents have given me in the last election. I truly appreciate it and thank them from the bottom of my heart.
After that break from the House from 2019 to 2025, I would like all my colleagues to believe me: Any seat in the House is a great seat. I have said it before and will say it again to new members. I could not have done it without the support of my partner, my children, my family, and my friends. Without the support of my fantastic volunteers, Roger Hamel and Bérénice St-Martin—
[English]
Housing
Mr. Speaker, after the lost Liberal decade, Canadians can no longer afford the housing hell created by the Liberals. According to one homelessness report, in the Niagara region, chronic homelessness is up 41%. The problem is only getting worse, and I can see the evidence in every community in my riding. According to one homebuilding association, housing starts are decelerating rapidly, and a massive supply deficit is beginning to come about.
Meanwhile, existing homeowners are also struggling. According to Equifax, homeowners are experiencing a 6% increase in people being unable to make a mortgage payment, and the 90-plus day mortgage delinquency has increased by 71% across Ontario. The Liberal plan will create a second housing bureaucracy and do nothing to build more homes.
Canadians want action. Conservatives will continue to support a real plan that will lower taxes, make life more affordable and bring home the dream of home ownership in Canada.
National Indigenous History Month
Mr. Speaker, as I rise for the first time as the member of Parliament for Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the constituents of our riding for putting their trust in me as their representative. To my campaign team, I say that this journey would not have been possible without them.
June is National Indigenous History Month in Canada. It is a month to celebrate indigenous culture. It is a time to reflect on our shared history, and it is a time to acknowledge the vast contributions of first nations, Inuit and Métis. National Indigenous History Month is also an opportunity to embrace indigenous events in our communities, hear the beautiful languages and support the work of indigenous arts and crafts. I encourage all Canadians to get involved in National Indigenous History Month this June.
Wela'lioq. Meegwetch. Marsi. Nakurmiik.
Oral Questions
[Oral Questions]
[English]
Canada-U.S. Relations
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister ran on “elbows up”, promising dollar-for-dollar tariffs on the U.S. and that this would generate $20 billion in revenue. It turns out it was actually elbows down when the Prime Minister broke his promise and secretly cancelled those tariffs. Now Trump is threatening 50% tariffs on Canadian steel, which will devastate Canada's steel industry and put thousands of steelworkers out of their jobs.
Can the Prime Minister look steelworkers in the eye, tell them it was actually elbows down and how much money his tariffs will actually generate?
Mr. Speaker, we have been clear in the House, as has the Prime Minister, that we will fight against these unjustified and illegal tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum. We are going to protect our workers and our industry. The Minister of Industry already spoke about that over the weekend, and we are going to build a strong Canada. We are going to build the Canada of tomorrow, which is a confident Canada, a prosperous Canada, a Canada that we can all be proud of.
Mr. Speaker, it does not matter what Liberal stands up to answer a question. Whether it is in this Parliament or the last Parliament, they never actually answer a question. It is not complicated, as “elbows up” was dollar-for-dollar tariffs.
Has the Prime Minister already broken his promise to steelworkers or was “elbows up” simply fake news? Now we are facing the Trump tariffs, and steelworkers from coast to coast to coast are in serious jeopardy of losing their jobs. It is a simple question: How much money from these “elbows up” tariffs have they generated?
Mr. Speaker, we know there is a lot of anxiety across the country, particularly when it comes to the steel and aluminum sectors. That is why, over the weekend, I was in contact with industry leaders, as well as union leaders, and we will continue to make sure we protect their jobs.
To be in solution mode, we will make sure that Canadian steel and aluminum are used in our major infrastructure projects. That is why steelworkers said over the weekend, “At a time when our steel and aluminum sectors are being hit by massive U.S. tariffs, this is the kind of leadership we've been demanding and [it] has delivered.”
Mr. Speaker, to be clear, the Prime Minister promised elbows up against U.S. tariffs. He promised dollar-for-dollar countertariffs. He promised it would generate $20 billion in revenue, but he broke those promises. He secretly dropped countertariffs to effectively zero. He stopped fighting back against President Trump pretty early on, and now Trump is threatening to double tariffs on Canadian steel to 50%, which is a direct attack against our workers, their livelihoods and the Canadian economy.
If the Prime Minister really is elbows up, if he really is fighting back, can he tell our steelworkers how many dollars have been collected in countertariff revenue from the U.S.? How many dollars? What is the number?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for the fact that she will now be my critic. It is good news. I am looking forward to working with her.
Indeed, the comments coming out of the White House are preoccupying. That being said, no executive order has been signed yet, so we take these comments very seriously, but we are working on all scenarios. That is why the Prime Minister is in Saskatoon meeting with the premiers of the provinces and territories, and it is also why we will make sure we execute our plan to fight, protect and build.
Mr. Speaker, I did not hear a dollar amount on revenue from those countertariffs, so we can assume it is effectively zero. If the steel tariffs were not bad enough, the Prime Minister is determined to keep the industrial carbon tax on our steel production, driving up the cost of steel production here at home, which perhaps is really no surprise, given the Prime Minister claimed that Canadians do not even use that much steel, as if we do not use dishwashers, fridges, cars, pots and pans, baby strollers, and housing infrastructure, all of which are made with steel.
How can the Prime Minister claim to be elbows up for workers and fighting for affordability while keeping a punishing carbon tax on our Canadian steel producers?
Mr. Speaker, we will take no lessons from the Conservatives. We have put in place as a country, as a nation, the largest countertariffs in our history to protect our workers in the steel industry, the aluminum industry and the forestry sector, in all the sectors of our economy, to defend our workers and our industries. We should all, in the House, stand proudly to defend Canadian workers, defend Canadian industry and build Canada strong. That is Canadian.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, aluminum workers in our Saguenay region are very concerned. The Prime Minister promised Canadians that he would stand up to the Americans and their tariffs, yet President Trump is once again threatening to impose a 50% increase. Meanwhile, the Liberal government has reduced tariffs on American products to almost zero, but the Prime Minister assured us that the government would take in $20 billion.
Can our workers in Saguenay find out how much the Prime Minister has gotten from countertariffs so far?
Mr. Speaker, I understand my colleague's concern; the entire aluminum sector feels the same way. That is why, over the weekend, I attended the 2025 aluminum summit in Montreal on Sunday evening. I not only met with industry leaders, but I also spoke with the unions.
We will continue to support our aluminum sector in Quebec. We will use aluminum and steel from Quebec and Canada in our infrastructure projects. We will create jobs, we will protect them, and we will be able to defend ourselves against this injustice imposed by the White House.
Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada
Mr. Speaker, many Canadians voted for the Prime Minister because they thought he would stand up to President Trump, but he did away with countertariffs on American products in short order. He also said he would be more fiscally responsible, but his spending estimates are even bigger than those of his predecessor. He talks like a Conservative, but governs like Justin Trudeau. He says one thing, then does the opposite.
When will the Prime Minister stop talking out of both sides of his mouth?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's comments surprise me. He should actually be proud to have a government that stands up to the Americans. Had we listened to the Conservatives, we would have capitulated.
Members on this side of the House are standing up for workers in the industry. We know how important Quebec's aluminum industry is. We know how skilled and talented our workers are. The best aluminum in the world is produced right here, in Canada, in Quebec.
We will continue to stand up for the industry and our workers, and we will continue to build a strong country together.
Oil and Gas Industry
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals were elected on a promise to make Donald Trump's tariff threats their priority. However, what the first ministers discussed in Saskatoon today was not the new tariff threats against aluminum and steel. The priority they discussed was how to force Quebec to accept a dirty oil pipeline from the west. Quebeckers voted for a government that would protect them from Donald Trump. They did not vote for pipelines.
Will the Liberals get their priorities straight?
Mr. Speaker, it goes without saying that Quebeckers are very concerned about the White House's tariff war. That is why they elected 44 Quebec Liberal MPs, something they have not done since 1981. We are going to be there to stand up for jobs in the aluminum sector because we know that this sector is being threatened with higher tariffs.
Of course, we will work with the members from Saguenay—Lac‑Saint‑Jean, Bécancour and other regions, and we will stand firm and strong to protect our jobs.
Mr. Speaker, before meeting with Quebec and the provinces today, the Prime Minister met with business people first yesterday. He was not meeting with steel or aluminum representatives to talk about Donald Trump's new tariff threats. No, he was meeting with fossil fuel CEOs. Oil companies come first; Quebec and the provinces come second. The Prime Minister was not elected to serve oil companies. He was elected to protect Quebec's economy from Donald Trump's threats.
Why is he putting oil companies first?
Mr. Speaker, I think the Bloc Québécois needs to understand that the Prime Minister's role is to be able to talk to everyone, whether they are in the aluminum, steel, clean energy or conventional energy sectors. That is the job of the Prime Minister, which no Bloc Québécois member will never be.
That said, what is most important right now is that we want to build. We are going to invest in major infrastructure projects. For Quebec, one of the fundamental infrastructure projects is the high-speed train between Windsor and Quebec City, something the Bloc Québécois should support.
Mr. Speaker, while the Prairies burn, the first ministers are in Saskatoon talking about dirty oil pipelines and scrapping environmental assessments. That is the Canadian identity today: A Liberal Prime Minister who sits down with oil companies before discussing matters with his counterparts, and provinces that isolate Quebec in order to force it into accepting a pipeline. All these people keep telling us that Canadian unity and the national interest are at stake.
Does the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture honestly believe that Canadian unity and the national interest are all about building pipelines while the Prairies are burning?
Mr. Speaker, what is in the national interest is creating and protecting jobs.
That is the question that people in every Bloc Québécois riding and every riding here are asking themselves: Who can deliver the goods? Only one party can, and that is the Liberal Party. Only one government can protect and create jobs, and that is the Liberal government.
We will get there by working with the Government of Quebec, of course, and by working with all the provinces. In this tariff war, it is essential to refute the White House's rhetoric and create jobs at the same time.
[English]
Canada-U.S. Relations
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised elbows up with dollar-for-dollar tariffs on the U.S. that would collect $20 billion. The Prime Minister then broke that promise, giving Canadians elbows down when he dropped the tariffs on the U.S. to effectively zero. Now Trump is threatening to double tariffs on Canadian steel to 50%, attacking Canadian workers, their jobs, their livelihoods and our industry.
Can the Prime Minister tell our steelworkers how much has been collected from tariffs on the U.S.?
Mr. Speaker, clearly the member on the other side is misinformed, but let us talk about the great things we have been doing for Canadians lately.
Last week, we introduced, as the first thing in the House, a tax reduction for the middle class, and 22 million Canadians will benefit from that measure. Not only did we do that, but we also made sure that we removed the GST for first-time homebuyers for homes up to $1 million dollars. Those are measures that make a difference in the lives of Canadians. Those are measures that make a difference in every region of Canada. Those are measures that build a strong Canada.
Mr. Speaker, did the steelworkers in Hamilton hear that? There was not one number in that arrogant answer.
I do not think that is surprising given that this is a government whose Prime Minister believes that Canadians do not actually use steel in their daily lives. For workers and businesses in my community of Hamilton looking for the support that might have come from the revenue of those countertariffs, they are being left empty handed, and they are worried about their futures.
Let me ask this again: If the Liberals are truly fighting back, can they tell us how much has been collected from tariffs? I ask them to just give a number.
Mr. Speaker, we know that there is a lot of anxiety across the country in the steel and aluminum sector, particularly in Hamilton. That is why I was in contact with the CEO of ArcelorMittal Dofasco over the weekend. I also talked to the head of the Canadian steelworkers and am making sure that our MPs from Hamilton are really on board as they are fighting for jobs in their communities.
This rhetoric coming out of the White House is extremely preoccupying, but no executive order has been signed. That is why we will continue to fight with countertariffs to protect our workers and make sure that we build national projects.
Employment
Mr. Speaker, unemployment is up 7%. Youth unemployment is at 14%. Canadians cannot find work, and the burden of government red tape is making things even worse. Small businesses spend 32 working days every year wrapped up in excessive regulations. It is no wonder they cannot afford to hire or innovate.
Will the Liberals finally cut the red tape strangling our economy so businesses can hire and Canadians can find jobs?
Mr. Speaker, the government is focused on making sure that employers have the quality, skill and talent they need to grow their small and medium-sized businesses and ensure that corporations across the country have the kind of innovation and talent they are asking for.
I would recommend that the member listen to and check in with the employers in his riding who are talking about the need for more talent. We will be there for every Canadian who wants to ensure that they, too, can get a great job.
Mr. Speaker, it has been 10 years that I have been listening to Canadians. The minister should listen to Canadians who cannot find a job. There are fewer new entrepreneurs than ever. Productivity and growth are down. Forget the scissors and the pruners. We need a chainsaw to cut through all this red tape. It is time to clear a path for Canadians to be successful and to hire.
Why do the Liberals keep choking Canadian workers and businesses with their red tape?
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister often says, no one can be against the good things that Canadians can do for themselves.
The Prime Minister and ministers are in Saskatoon today doing the hard work of removing red tape in the form of internal trade barriers so we can have one Canadian economy and not 13 Canadian economies. This could lower prices up to 15%, increase productivity up to 7% and add $200 billion to the economy. That is eliminating red tape. That is standing up for Canada.
Canada-U.S. Relations
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised elbows up, promised dollar-for-dollar tariffs on the U.S. and claimed he would collect $20 billion. The Prime Minister broke that promise, giving Canadian steel and auto workers an elbow in the ribs when he dropped tariffs on the U.S. to, effectively, zero. Now President Trump is threatening to double tariffs on Canadian steel to 50%, attacking Canadian workers, their jobs, their livelihoods and our industry.
Can the Prime Minister tell us how much he has actually collected from tariffs so far and how he is going to help secure jobs in Windsor?
Mr. Speaker, we will not only make sure that Canadian steel and aluminum are in our major projects, but we will also make sure that all the investments we are putting up in defence are to create jobs, which will have an impact on the steel and aluminum sector. That is why the United Steelworkers mentioned, at a time when our steel and aluminum sectors are being hit by massive U.S. tariffs, that this is the kind of leadership it has been demanding and that has been delivered by the government.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised elbows up, promised dollar-for-dollar tariffs on the U.S. and promised he would collect $20 billion in revenue, but in reality, he quietly dropped the tariffs on the U.S., practically to zero. Now Donald Trump is threatening to double tariffs on Canadian steel to 50%. This will destroy our industry and punish our workers.
Since the Canadian tax revenue was supposed to support Canadian steelworkers, can the Prime Minister tell us how much he has collected so far for jobs in Oxford? Give us just the number.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to see in the House the same movement we have seen with steelworkers in the industry. This is a time when we need to come together as a nation. This is the moment to fight the unjustified tariffs together. This is a time to make sure we protect our industry and our workers. This is a time when we need to build this country, like the Prime Minister is doing with the premiers today in Saskatoon. I just wish, in the House, that everyone would stand up to defend our industry, defend our workers and build Canada strong.
Carbon Pricing
Mr. Speaker, surprise, surprise, the Liberals cannot give us a number. Now Trump's 50% tariffs on steel will shut down our plants across our country. Thousands of jobs are on the line. Layoffs have already started in Oxford. There is anxiety on our shop floors and at our kitchen tables.
It is not just Trump's tariffs that are killing jobs; it is also the Liberal industrial carbon tax.
If the Prime Minister cannot get a deal with Trump on tariffs, will he at least give our workers a fighting chance and remove the Liberal industrial carbon tax today?
Mr. Speaker, we know that we need to make sure that we fight back with strong countertariffs against the rhetoric coming out of the White House. However, our strategy has been working. There are only two countries on earth that have put up countertariffs against tariffs by the Americans: China and us.
Today the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said that the threat of 50% tariffs on the steel and aluminum sector is completely unacceptable. We will work with our allies within American society, and we will make sure that we fight back.
[Translation]
Democratic Institutions
Mr. Speaker, the election proved that the federal government treats indigenous people like second-class citizens. In Abitibi—Baie‑James—Nunavik—Eeyou, Inuit people were unable to vote. Reports indicate that polling station hours were not respected in at least six communities. The polling station in Ivujivik did not even open at all. No one was able to vote. If this happened in Toronto, it would be a scandal, but it is tolerated in the north.
Does the Minister of Indigenous Services think it is right that Inuit people were thus denied their right to vote?
Mr. Speaker, Elections Canada is an independent agency that securely and effectively protects our democracy. In fact, it is one of the best such agencies in the world. If there are problems with an election or the way it is carried out in Canada, then obviously the questions should be addressed to Elections Canada.
Mr. Speaker, Elections Canada stripped Inuit people of their right to vote, the most fundamental right in a democracy. That is completely unacceptable, yet it is accepted. No one is talking about it. We have no right to condone the harm done to the Inuit by Elections Canada, whether through incompetence or negligence.
What will the minister do to ensure that Elections Canada discloses everything that happened? What measures will she put in place to ensure that this never happens again in her riding or anywhere else?
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member is well aware, if there are problems, he can obviously share his concerns with Elections Canada, as can all Canadians. I am sure that this independent agency, which is the envy of the world, will try to answer these questions.
It goes without saying that Canadians have an absolute right to vote. We fight for that every day in the House. Elections Canada is responsible for conducting our elections. It does that very well, but it will address those concerns.
[English]
Finance
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister introduced his first spending bill. The Liberals increased spending by 8% after promising to keep it below 2%. Spending on consultants alone increased by more than 36%, to an unprecedented $26.1 billion. Now, every Canadian household has to pay $1,400 per year in taxes just to pay for well-connected Liberal insiders. Liberal spending drives inflation.
When will the Liberals spend responsibly to ensure that Canadians, including residents of Kitchener Centre, never have to decide between filling the refrigerator and putting—
Mr. Speaker, the new government is making sure that spending is being carefully managed and is focused on our most pressing priorities.
In 2023 and 2024, departments started reducing spending on professional services and travel services by $500 million. We will continue to review our spending to make sure we are being efficient, effective and focused.
Mr. Speaker, on the very day the Prime Minister pledged a 2% spending cap, his government unveiled a bill that surges spending by 8%, shattering that promise. Consultant fees skyrocketed by 36% after the Liberals promised to cut them, costing Canadian families $1,400 in additional taxes. While households are forced to manage their budgets, the Liberal government acts unchecked, putting jobs at risk.
After 10 years of Liberal failures, why does the Prime Minister think it is okay to spend even more money on government insiders and lobbyists?
Mr. Speaker, I just talked about our spending reduction. Let us also talk about investment in the main estimates, which includes important funding to support dental care, the Canadian Forces and border services. The new government is investing in Canadians to build Canada strong.
Mr. Speaker, we have a new Prime Minister, but nothing has changed. He is proposing the same spending that will cause the same painful consequences for Canadians. People in the auto industry in Windsor, Ontario, are worried about losing their home if they are laid off. The results of Liberal spending are missed mortgage payments and skyrocketing job losses.
Why is the Liberal government asking to spend half a trillion dollars, causing further inflation, without a budget plan?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome my colleague to the House. She should know that we made generational investment in Windsor in the auto sector. She should be celebrating the Liberal government. She should be standing up to thank the government.
The workers, the industry and people in Windsor can see a future. The people in Windsor know that we have their back. They know that we are going to fight for them. We are going to fight for the industry. We are going to fight for the auto workers. We are going to build Canada strong together.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister presented his first estimates last week. After 10 years of a Liberal government, I thought no one could do worse than Justin Trudeau. Unfortunately, I was wrong.
The Prime Minister inherited a bloated Liberal government. Although he promised to spend less, he is now spending 8% more than Justin Trudeau spent in his last year, all without a budget.
How will the Prime Minister of Canada explain to his colleague, Quebec's former finance minister, that Canada can be managed without a budget?
Mr. Speaker, we did indeed receive a strong mandate to improve government efficiency using means like new technologies. We also received a mandate to reduce reliance on outside consultants, which we are doing and will continue to do, while still ensuring that the public service has the expertise and tools it needs to carry out its mission.
However, I would point out that the estimates include things like funding for the Canadian dental care plan, which benefits thousands of people in the riding of my colleague on the other side of the House. The Conservatives said during the campaign that they would support the plan, but now they are going to vote against it.
It is unfortunate and deplorable that my colleague is depriving thousands of his constituents of the Canadian dental care plan.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think that we have to take any management lessons from the Liberal government.
Total spending will grow almost three times faster than inflation and population growth combined. This is a half-trillion-dollar spending plan with no budget.
How can Liberal colleagues who go in their ridings to meet with single mothers, families, seniors, and business owners, people who are struggling to make ends meet, accept this kind of spending without a budget?
Mr. Speaker, I have been in the House for 10 years now, and I am grateful to the people of Louis-Hébert. I have seen the Conservatives' selective amnesia, which causes them to forget that just a month ago, they were unable to present a costed platform, even though they had been calling for an election for years. The numbers they used were not worth the paper they were printed on.
My colleague talks about seniors and the people in his riding. What will he tell them after voting against the Canadian dental care plan, which two days ago was extended to people between the ages of 18 and 64? This will give millions of Canadians access to dental care. He should support it. He should be ashamed of voting against it.
[English]
Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for Rural Development—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: It is indeed a very serious issue, and I would ask my Conservative friends to calm down a little bit.
Mr. Speaker, very serious wildfires are taking place in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Victims of the fires are having to be evacuated from rural communities in the Prairies by the thousands. This is a very serious issue. I want to compliment the firefighters and the first responders for their efforts and for doing a fantastic job.
Can the secretary of state explain what it is the federal government is—
Mr. Speaker, it is a very serious matter. I was home in Saskatchewan this weekend; I met with the premier, and we had a very good press conference. I met with Métis and indigenous leaders. I met with local leaders, and I met with a lot of different groups, including evacuees who are struggling during this very challenging time.
Many of my constituents were forced to flee their homes. Certainly our prayers are sent out to them. I will say quickly that the federal government is ready to assist. We will be there for Saskatchewan. We will be there for Manitoba. We will be there for all of Canada.
Oil and Gas Industry
Mr. Speaker, when knocking on doors, I met Foothills families whose members were in tears because they are losing their jobs and losing their businesses because of the Liberal attacks on Canadian energy. These are small business owners who employ hundreds of thousands of Canadians right across this country. They need real action and no more political games. Like the provinces, they want to build because pipelines mean paycheques, a growing economy and energy independence. Why are the Liberals the only holdout?
The Prime Minister is meeting with premiers in Saskatchewan today. Will he approve a pipeline at that meeting?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is indeed meeting the 13 provincial and territorial leaders today with one clear goal: to support nation-building projects that bring Canadians together by ensuring that they are expedited but also efficiently reviewed. As the Prime Minister said, any project will need to get consensus from the provinces, indigenous communities and private partners and will be subject to assessment, but the Prime Minister has also been clear that it is time to build in Canada, and build is what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister may be meeting, but he sure is not listening. While he dawdles, the opportunities to unleash Canadian energy pass us by because of the Liberals' anti-energy legislation, which blocks infrastructure and blocks investment. The provinces want to build and Canadian workers want to work. Canadians want energy independence, but Bill C-69 blocks pipelines and Bill C-48 blocks shipping. The job-killing carbon tax and the industrial carbon tax are punishing our energy sector.
Will the Prime Minister end his attacks on Canadian oil and gas and repeal his anti-energy legislation today?
Mr. Speaker, we were served another reminder just this weekend of the threats we face in terms of trade around the world. This government will fight, protect and build.
The Prime Minister is in Saskatoon today with 13 provincial and territorial leaders to build one Canadian economy, not 13. We intend to build this country. We intend to build major national projects in this country, and we intend to put Canadian steel, Canadian aluminum and Canadian workers to work building the country that we live in.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is meeting with the provinces in Saskatoon today. The consensus is clear, as the call to build pipelines and energy infrastructure becomes louder and louder: The only one standing in the way is the federal Liberal government. Building energy projects means a stronger Canadian economy, less dependence on the United States and powerful paycheques for Canadian workers.
Will the Liberal government approve a pipeline at the meeting in Saskatchewan today?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been very clear, and I do not know if my friends across the aisle have heard it clearly. Certainly Canadians heard it in the last federal election, as they returned a Liberal government with a very clear mandate to fight for this country, fight against trade threats from other places, protect the citizens of this country, protect our natural resources, protect our workers and build: build this country and build major national projects. That is what is on the agenda today in Saskatoon.
Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot of rhetoric from the Liberal government about making Canada an energy superpower, but its commitment to job-killing anti-Canadian energy legislation holds back our potential as a nation. The actions needed today are to repeal the no new pipeline bill, Bill C-69; repeal the shipping ban bill, Bill C-48; repeal the job-killing oil and gas production cap; and repeal the industrial carbon tax.
Will the Liberal government take action today, the action needed, to repeal its anti-energy agenda?
Mr. Speaker, once again, I do not know how we can be much more clear. The Prime Minister convened the 13 provincial and territorial leaders today with the express purpose of discussing with them the kinds of major national nation-building projects that this country can consider undertaking. That is what is going on in Saskatoon. I do not know if the members across actually follow the news or followed the election campaign, but we said that it is time to build, and build is what we are going to do.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is in Saskatchewan today meeting with all the premiers. We have been hearing what I think is a clear consensus for some time now. More and more calls to build pipelines and energy infrastructure are being heard. Quebeckers want a pipeline. The only problem is the federal government.
Building energy projects strengthens our economy, reduces our dependence on the United States and provides a powerful pay cheque for our workers.
Will the Liberal government approve the building of pipelines in Canada today?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is indeed in Saskatoon today. What is he talking about there? He is talking about energy. He is talking about projects of national significance. He is talking about removing barriers between Canada's 13 provinces and territories to create one economy, which some economists estimate could increase our gross domestic product by 4%.
We are obviously going to work to provide good jobs and investment in Quebec and across Canada. We are here to build Canada.
Mr. Speaker, throughout the election campaign, the Prime Minister said he had a plan to build new energy projects. What better time than today to present his plan to all of Canada's premiers and explain how he will produce that energy?
The citizens of Montmorency—Charlevoix and people across Quebec and Canada are tired of paying more for less. Will the Liberal government think about the regions and repeal the anti-energy legislation, Bill C-69?
Mr. Speaker, I know the member is new here. I do not know if he follows the news, but the Prime Minister is in Saskatoon. He is working with all of the provinces and territories.
What are they talking about at that meeting? They are talking about energy projects and other initiatives to make Canada a global economic superpower. Building Canada is our mandate. That is the mandate we sought in the election campaign. Building Canada is what we are going to do.
[English]
Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, the very first call I received from a Calgarian was from a small business owner being extorted by criminals for $300,000. Extortions in Calgary, Brampton and Edmonton are on the rise and only getting worse. Under the Liberals, extortion cases are up 357%. The Liberals voted down Conservative Bill C-381 to tackle extortion. The bill set mandatory minimum penalties for extortion after the Liberals took away penalties in their soft-on-crime bill, Bill C-5.
Will the Prime Minister work with Conservatives to adopt Bill C-381 to crack down on violent extortions?
Mr. Speaker, extortion is a serious crime and we are taking it seriously. Extortion carries a penalty of life in prison in Canada. That is extremely serious. If committed with a firearm, there are minimum sentences as well.
We will act decisively to strengthen the Criminal Code and move aggressively to protect victims by making bail laws stricter for violent, organized criminals. We will work closely with the RCMP and local police across the country.
We created a task force. There is more work to do. We are investigating these serious issues, and I hope the criminals—
Mental Health and Addictions
Mr. Speaker, failed liberal drug policies flooding the streets with dangerous drugs and causing crime and chaos in our streets are making the addiction crisis worse. Every day, 22 Canadians die from drug overdose. During the lost Liberal decade, we have seen more people die from addiction than we lost in the Second World War. We have heard heartbreaking stories of young people becoming addicted to drugs labelled as safe, only to later lose their life to addiction. The Conservatives want to see investment in treatment and recovery.
I have a simple question: Will the Prime Minister reverse course and put an end to the deadly, unsafe supply program today?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. This issue greatly affects Canadians. I want her to know that my department and I will be looking into the matter. We will continue working toward finding solutions.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, fentanyl is 100 times more potent than heroin, and as little as two milligrams can kill a person. Through the lost Liberal decade, Canada has become a fentanyl manufacturing hub, with Breaking Bad-style superlabs popping up across the country. Mass fentanyl production is mass murder, but Liberal laws let the monsters who traffic the deadly drugs walk free.
The Conservatives are proposing mandatory life sentences to those involved with the trafficking, production and distribution of more than 40 milligrams of fentanyl. Will the Prime Minister take real action and give life sentences to the drug kingpins committing mass murder?
Mr. Speaker, fentanyl has impacted every single community in North America. We see the impacts of fentanyl. Its use has killed so many young people. 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 a laser-sharp focus on dismantling fentanyl rings. We will put those who profit from this drug behind bars. We will always be there to protect Canadians.
[Translation]
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
Mr. Speaker, francophone immigration plays an essential role in strengthening and enhancing the vitality of francophone minority communities across the country and in growing our economy. That is why I am very proud to say that we have set ambitious targets for the next few years: 8.5% in 2025, 9.5% in 2026 and 10% in 2027.
Can the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship update the House on our government's efforts on francophone immigration?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and his work on francophone immigration.
Last year, we exceeded our target for francophone immigration outside Quebec. We are committed to ensuring the long-term strength and growth of francophone communities. That is why our new government will set a target of 12% francophone immigration outside Quebec by 2029.
[English]
Oil and Gas Industry
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister just handed the keys to his government to Marc-André Blanchard, Trudeau's UN ambassador and now his chief of staff. This is the guy who wants to invest in killing oil and gas and do it—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister just handed the keys to the government to Mr. Blanchard, Trudeau's UN ambassador and now his chief of staff. This is the guy who wants to invest in killing oil and gas. Where are the claps? He wants to do it through Brookfield. Who else worked at Brookfield? Anyone? It was the Prime Minister himself.
Why is the Prime Minister surrounding his government with Trudeau loyalists who want to shut down Canada's energy sector? Is that why he still refuses to publicly disclose his Brookfield assets?
Mr. Speaker, first of all, we welcome the appointment of a new chief of staff in the Office of the Prime Minister. Mr. Blanchard is a great public servant and a great Canadian who has had a stellar career in the private and public sectors. We welcome him back to the public service.
As for the Prime Minister, he follows, as all members must, the most stringent code of ethics for elected members in the world, and the Prime Minister will obviously continue to comply with all of the rules.
Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, it is not just the energy sector under threat. It is public safety too. While the Prime Minister's new chief of staff is hell-bent on shutting down oil and gas, he has also brought back David Lametti as principal secretary, the same failed justice minister—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Is the Prime Minister really doubling down on the same Trudeau insiders who always put criminals over community safety?
Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a very odd fixation on the personnel decisions in the Prime Minister's Office. The obvious accountability is done in the House, as the member well knows, and he can ask any question he wants of any minister of the House without impugning people who are not here.
Mr. Lametti, for his part, is a great former parliamentarian, a great Italian Canadian and a distinguished person who is entering public service. These people should be celebrating that great Canadians are prepared to step up and enrol in public service and serve Canadians.
Government Priorities
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister yesterday announced his new chief of staff and principal secretary. These are two of the top officials, some of the most powerful people in Ottawa, directing policy. The new chief of staff wants to kill oil and gas and says it needs to be done through Brookfield. David Lametti, who was Trudeau's justice minister, oversaw our broken bail system and kept Bill C-5's and Bill C-75's laws on the books.
Why is the Prime Minister surrounding himself with former Trudeau officials who want to keep oil and gas in the ground and keep soft-on-crime laws on the books?
Mr. Speaker, I do not understand this odd fixation with personnel decisions. What we have in this House are a number of public servants who are quite willing to answer questions about the public policies of this government and to be held accountable for those.
We, obviously, celebrate when distinguished, capable and talented people join the Government of Canada. That is certainly the case, as we heard over the weekend. I suggest members move on to asking about the issues that Canadians are concerned about.
The Economy
Mr. Speaker, in the face of repeated threats by the United States to our economic sovereignty, Canadians chose to give our government a strong mandate to build a strong Canada. As we have heard, today the Prime Minister and premiers are meeting in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, one of the economic engines of this great country, and strengthening Canada's economy is on the agenda.
Now, members opposite have imagined a lot of outcomes from a meeting they were not invited to. In an effort to get back to facts, can the Minister of Finance and National Revenue inform the House on details of this work and its importance to Canada?
Mr. Speaker, I welcome my colleague from Calgary Confederation to this House and thank him for the excellent work he is doing for the people of Calgary, as well as Alberta.
Indeed, the first ministers meeting is happening today in Saskatoon. It is an important opportunity for the Prime Minister to bring the premiers together around the table with one common agenda, focusing on building a stronger and united Canada. It is time to build one Canadian economy and accelerate the approval of nation-building projects.
Together we are going to build Canada strong. That is what we are doing.
Committees of the House
Mr. Speaker, for seven months, parliamentary committees have sat idle while, according to the Prime Minister, the country is facing an existential threat. It appears that he is in no rush to have them constituted.
The committees are an important function of our democracy. Committees are where bills are scrutinized; where witnesses tell MPs about the impacts these bills and threats are having on their businesses, their lives and their communities; and where the government is held to account. We do not have a budget, and without committees, there will be no oversight or accountability. Maybe that is what the Prime Minister wants.
Will the Prime Minister commit to ensuring that committees are in place before his summer vacation starts?
Mr. Speaker, I have taken careful note. Of course, standing committees will be constituted in this House, as they always are. I wonder where that member was last fall, when his party spent three straight months refusing to hear one single government proposal with respect to improving the lives of Canadians, with respect to improving our environment and with respect to moving forward on projects.
Where was that member? He should be ashamed of asking that question right now.
[Translation]
Foreign affairs.
Mr. Speaker, for the past 20 months, the Netanyahu regime has been ruthlessly bombing Palestinians in Gaza. The result is that 54,000 are dead, including 15,000 children, thousands have been injured, starvation is being used as a weapon of war, hospitals are being bombed and families are being burned alive. Humanity said "never again", but now this is happening again right before our very eyes. The Prime Minister joined France and England in saying that if this did not stop, they would not stand idly by.
Are the Liberals preparing sanctions against Netanyahu and his cabinet on behalf of all the children who have been injured and killed in Gaza?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, Canada is deeply concerned about the renewed escalation in Gaza. These attacks put the lives of countless civilians in danger. We urge both parties to remain committed to ceasefires and stop the preventable loss of countless lives. Essentials like food, electricity, fuel and medical supplies must never be used as political tools. We call for their immediate and unimpeded flow into the strip and for the release of all remaining hostages.
Routine Proceedings
[Routine Proceedings]
[English]
Petitions
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of Canadians who are lamenting the fact that the government is going to go right into its summer holidays without presenting a budget to Canadians about how Liberals are spending their hard-earned tax dollars. This is the first time this has happened in Canadian history, especially with a legacy government.
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, this is obviously not a petition. It is more of a member's statement that is being made. If the member is presenting a petition, he should be talking about the essence of the petition only.
The hon. member can proceed, focusing on the petition, and I would ask that he start over. We will see where it goes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of Canadians who are lamenting the fact that there is no budget going into the summer holiday the government plans to take without presenting to Canadians how it is going to be spending their hard-earned tax dollars. The petitioners talk about this being the first time in Canadian history that a legacy government has not presented a spring budget and is going to put it off until the fall. They talk about the creation of uncertainty and lack of public trust that comes from this.
Therefore, the petitioners call on the federal government to immediately table a budget and extend the House sitting so we can get some clarity on what the government is spending money on beyond the $60 billion plus that it presented in its policies during the election campaign.
I table this on behalf of Canadians across the country.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to table a petition on behalf of Vancouver East constituents who took part in the peace train journey to Ottawa to promote a culture of peace and resist the culture of war.
The petitioners note that Canada is a signatory to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Canada's adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples further reflects our commitment to the principles of justice, equality and freedom. They note that these principles are essential to peace, to preventing conflict and war, and for Canada's own security and stability. They also note that a lack of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms is a chief underlying cause of violent conflict.
In the face of ever-increasing violent wars, nuclear threat, climate disruption and humanitarian crises, the signatories call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to establish and fund a centre of excellence for peace and justice focused on research, education and training in conflict resolution, diplomacy and peace operations for Canadian civilians, police, military personnel and the international community.
Mr. Speaker, I am also tabling a petition on behalf of the peace trainers from my riding, from Parksville, Denman Island, Courtenay, Port Alberni and Bamfield.
The petitioners cite that the lack of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms is the underlying cause of violent conflict. They highlight that an open society and an informed public and Parliament are essential for the understanding of complex issues of violent conflict and for the achievement of lasting peace and disarmament. With the closing of the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre, Canada lost an important civilian-led, independent institutional structure that supported effective research policy and training in peace operations and conflict resolution.
The petitioners are calling on the House of Commons to establish and fund a centre of excellence for peace and justice focused on research, education and training in conflict resolution, diplomacy and peace operations for Canadian civilians, police, military personnel and the international community.
Southern Resident Killer Whales
Mr. Speaker, the petitioners call upon this House to consider the urgent crisis in the collapsing numbers of the population of southern resident killer whales. They have been identified as an endangered population under Canada's Species at Risk Act. There have been numerous programs and promises put in place, but the southern resident killer whale population continues to lack adequate protection and would be far better protected when they swim across the border and are in the waters of Washington state, where the rules are more rigid, the regulations are enforced immediately and boaters and large marine craft are aware that they can be fined and ticketed as opposed to ignored when they violate whale protections on our side of the border.
The petitioners urgently ask the Minister of Transport to impose mandatory vessel distance regulations, just as is the case south of the border in Washington state.
[Translation]
Questions on the Order Paper
Request for Emergency Debate
Wildfires in Manitoba and Saskatchewan
[S. O. 52]
I wish to inform the House that I have received notice of a request for an emergency debate. I invite the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre to rise and make a brief intervention.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to request an emergency debate regarding the devastating wildfires currently having an impact on Manitoba and surrounding regions.
As of last week, more than 17,000 people have been forced to evacuate their homes in northern Manitoba, many from remote and northern first nations communities. Thick smoke from these fires has spread across the country and into the United States, creating serious public health concerns.
Both Manitoba and Saskatchewan have declared a state of emergency and are now appealing for international assistance. However, Canada's emergency response system is once again failing those most in need, particularly indigenous communities. The response has been slow, bureaucratic and disconnected from the realities on the ground. First nations leadership and evacuees are sounding the alarm. The system is broken, and the people are paying the price.
In a country like Canada, no community should be left behind during a climate disaster. It is our duty as parliamentarians to act. Therefore, I respectfully request an emergency debate to deliberate on immediate actions to protect affected communities and ensure a just and effective response to this worsening crisis.
[Speaker's Ruling]
Speech from the Throne
[The Address]
[Translation]
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, and of the amendment as amended.
Mr. Speaker, my voice is a little weak today, but any time is a good time to speak on behalf of my constituents.
I will be sharing my time with my esteemed colleague, the member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.
I would like to begin by telling the voters of Québec Centre how proud and grateful I am that, on April 28, they voted for me for the fourth consecutive time. They have given me the opportunity to work with them in a positive, constructive and unifying manner, and I want to thank them for putting their trust in me. I look forward to representing them well here in Ottawa and in Quebec City.
The riding of Québec Centre is obviously the most beautiful riding in the country. I know other members say the same about their ridings, so let me just say that it is either the most or the second-most beautiful riding in Canada, and I will leave the final say to my own constituents. The people of my riding are proud and united. My riding is also diverse, and its people appreciate and are proud of how diverse Quebec City and the rest of Canada are.
I obviously want to thank my family for their unwavering support over the past several years. It means so much to me. Everyone in the House knows how essential the support of our families is to our work. Of course I am thinking of Marie-Chantal, Étienne, Clémence, Antoine and Jade, my daughter-in-law, and her two children, my two grandchildren. Their quiet strength gives me the energy and vision I need to do this work with integrity.
I am also thinking of my parents, to whom I owe everything. Their closeness and presence help me to this day. I am thinking of the volunteers in the Québec Centre riding, who ran a truly positive election campaign. They were connected to the people and present in our community. These are people who, for several weeks, would get up early to go door-knocking, make calls or put up signs. I remember the first night. It was windy and raining, but they came out anyway to keep our democracy alive.
I am also thinking of the other candidates in Québec Centre, namely Simon Bérubé, Tommy Bureau, Patrick Kerr and Daniel Brisson. These individuals, and their volunteers, put their hearts and souls into keeping our democracy alive with passionate, informed debates and exchanges that were always respectful and cordial. I thank them for their commitment and their sincere dedication to the people of Québec Centre.
Finally, I also want to thank the team at my Québec Centre office. Every day, Maya, Corinne, Fatima, Anie‑Ève, Steve and Nelson practise what we refer to back home as “positive people-centred politics”. That is what they are recognized and known for. Over the next few years, I will continue to work with them to advocate for a constituent-centred, positive, united and resilient approach to politics.
Speaking of unity and resilience, the past few years have put us to the test, what with the pandemic, the effects of the climate crisis, wars around the world, the increased cost of living and the recent global economic tensions and geopolitical tensions.
In response, the Speech from the Throne charts a course to a fairer, more sustainable and more prosperous future. The speech reflects this new government's desire to build a stronger Canada where no one is left behind.
The plan is clear. We must support families, young people and seniors in a demanding economic context, build more homes faster and at lower cost, and defend our interests and values in a context of trade and security tensions.
Our goal is to make Canada's economy the strongest in the G7 and to invest in a greener economy with more respect for healthy environments and healthy people. We want to create a more innovative, diversified and resilient economy that creates high-quality, high-paying jobs. Of course, we also want to promote reconciliation with indigenous peoples in Quebec and across Canada, along with respect for and affirmation of their rights.
In my riding of Québec Centre, these priorities are more than mere words. They have real meaning. They are talked about in shops in Saint‑Roch, in schools in Saint‑Sacrement, and in seniors' residences in Montcalm. They are discussed by small businesses in Old Quebec, by families in Vanier and Duberger‑Les Saules, by community organizations in Saint‑Sauveur and by the proud residents of Cap‑Blanc and the engaged residents of Saint‑Jean‑Baptiste. Their voices, our voices, our needs and our aspirations are what I bring with me here to the House.
I am particularly encouraged by the Canadian government's clear commitments on housing. Social and affordable housing need to be built more quickly. We must support co-operatives, public housing and non-profit housing organizations, and we must ensure that every Quebecker and Canadian, regardless of income or circumstances, can live, grow and be housed with dignity.
The plan we are putting forward aims not only to build more housing, but to also build better, faster and at lower cost. I would like to take this opportunity to highlight the historic agreement we signed nearly two years ago with the Quebec government. Thanks to this agreement, nearly 10,000 social and affordable housing units are currently being built. This is the largest housing agreement with Quebec in the history of the country. It is in fact the largest investment in social housing that the Quebec government has ever made, with support from the Canadian government. This clearly demonstrates that when governments work together, all Quebeckers, including the people of Québec Centre, can benefit enormously.
In the Speech from the Throne, the Canadian government also promised to invest in major projects. In my riding of Québec Centre and in greater Quebec City, there are a number of these projects, which will connect Canada, deepen its ties with the world and create high-paying jobs for generations.
I will start with Quebec City's strategic transit project, the tramway system that will ensure that Quebec City is no longer the only city of its size in Canada without a modern public transit system. Quebec City is also the capital of the nation of Quebec. We need this project, because it will create tens of thousands of jobs, speed up and even enable the construction of up to 15,000 housing units along the route, and bring in public and private investments to the tune of around $50,000 per family in Quebec City.
There is also the high-frequency train between Toronto and Quebec City and additional investments in the Davie shipyard, the largest shipyard in the country. For the last two years, Davie has been included in the new national shipbuilding strategy after being excluded by the previous government.
There is the Quebec Bridge, which is certainly an engineering marvel. It has been a majestic symbol of Canada's heritage since 1919. It has also been a thorn in the side of my constituents for decades, so we will rehabilitate it, protect it and upgrade its functionality.
I will close by talking about the Canadian dental care plan, which our colleague mentioned just a few minutes ago. The plan is already helping 15,000 seniors in my riding and 1.3 million across Quebec. Now, millions more, some four million, are eligible as of last month. We are each fortunate that it is our responsibility to let people know about this over the coming weeks.
In closing, it is obviously a tremendous privilege to be the member for Québec Centre. Being a member of Parliament is an opportunity that I share with many people here in the House. Regardless of our political stripes, we have an opportunity to work together on the Canadian government's key priorities.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, if I am not mistaken, the hon. member was at one point the President of the Treasury Board, who is responsible for overall government spending and fiscal accountability. One of the areas of concern that I have and many of my colleagues and Canadians have is that the Prime Minister has announced he is not going to have a budget until the fall. This is in the backdrop of him saying during the election campaign that “a plan beats no plan”.
Would the hon. member not agree, especially given his experience as the President of the Treasury Board, that this is the case and that Canadians should be seeing a budget so they know where the money is going to be spent and where the money is coming from?
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to hear my colleague, with whom I had the opportunity to work in various ways over previous years.
I agree, as he says, that we will have a budget at the appropriate time. That budget will contain all the updated information of which the hon. member is legitimately in need. He will be seeing these numbers and this budget at the appropriate time with the appropriate rigour invested in it.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech.
We are talking about fiscal responsibility. Our Conservative colleague was right to bring up the fact that we still do not have a budget, even though the government is planning expenditures.
The government is likely about to make a significant expenditure. There is talk of building pipelines across Canada. I remember Trans Mountain and the announcement the government made at the time about how it was going to buy and resell the pipeline and make money. As far as I know, that pipeline has not been sold, yet there is talk of building another one.
Does my colleague think it would be fiscally responsible for the government to spend money on buying a new pipeline when it has not yet managed to sell the first one and it has not yet tabled a budget?
Mr. Speaker, as my colleague knows perfectly well, the Canadian government has no intention of maintaining ownership of the Trans Mountain pipeline. It is built, it is operational and it will eventually be passed on to other owners, at the appropriate time.
On the issue of trade corridors, my colleague, whom I hold in high regard, also knows that we need more trade corridors between the different regions of Canada, and between Canada and other regions outside our borders, if we want to get stronger and be more resilient in the very troubling circumstances that we have been experiencing for several months now.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating my hon. colleague on his return to the House of Commons. I had the chance to visit his riding in the last session. I saw how much his constituents support him.
I would like to ask my colleague a question. What does he think about the Canadian dental care plan, which will be expanded to many people in his riding, people who sent him here again to ensure that the government can keep working on these kinds of issues? Can he tell us a bit about what he plans to do in that regard?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from London West whom I hold in high regard. She saw that the people of my riding were happy to welcome her. She also showed the people of my riding, Québec Centre, that there are proud francophones living outside Quebec who are proud of their community, who defend and promote it.
The Canadian dental care plan is an extraordinary success story. The reason people are hardly talking about it is that it is running very smoothly in my riding. Some 98% of dentists and hygienists are participating in the program and applauding the Canadian government every day. There are 15,000 seniors benefiting from it as well. As the member said, there are now thousands of other Canadians aged 18 to 64 who are still not aware that the program exists.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Prime Minister has presented an exclusionary throne speech in which there is zero mention of seniors, the disability community and youth mental health and addiction, with honourable mentions of women, gender-diverse folks, workers and indigenous people, even though his whole economic plan is dependent on indigenous lands, territories and resources. He also has no budget.
During an affordability crisis, how does the Prime Minister plan to address the growing inequality in Canada that is the result—
[Translation]
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I would need a greater amount of time to speak about the absolutely fundamental need to work on reconciliation and the affirmation of indigenous rights and freedoms. On seniors, as the hon. member knows, it is because of NDP support that we were able to—
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by congratulating you on your appointment.
I also want to thank the fine people of Boisbriand, Deux-Montagnes, Saint-Eustache and Rosemère for their support in the recent election. I am thankful to have once again been granted this privilege.
[English]
I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to my constituents for their support in the last election.
[Translation]
I am proud to stand before my constituents today following the 2025 Speech from the Throne, which lays out a path forward to a stronger, fairer and more united Canada. This speech is not simply a statement of intent; it is a commitment to the people of my riding about our shared future. While it came about at a time of global uncertainty, it offers hope. It lays out a clear path to a more just, resilient and united Canada. We need to put this vision into practice here, in our riding of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.
What caught my attention in particular, as far as Rivière-des-Mille-Îles is concerned, is defending the French language and Quebec culture. In Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, we know that the French language is much more than a communication tool. It is the beating heart of our identity, of our nation. It is not just a language; it is a memory, a culture, a world view. Our government is committed to strengthening the Official Languages Act. I will ensure that this translates into concrete measures to protect French, increased funding for francophone institutions across the country and increased support wherever it is needed.
Our Quebec culture also deserves to be protected and celebrated. This requires clear support for our artists, our production companies and our festivals. It also means standing up for CBC/Radio-Canada, our public broadcaster, which plays a vital role in disseminating our culture, identity, diversity and history, and which works to counter misinformation.
I would like to point out to all my colleagues that, in the last federal election, Quebeckers elected 44 Liberal members, or 56% of the 78 Quebec MPs. The government will be there to defend Quebeckers' interests at the decision-making table.
Protecting women's rights is another issue that I want to highlight. In a world where women's rights are still being challenged and threatened, we must remain vigilant. Canada must remain a beacon. It needs to reaffirm its commitment to protecting these rights, and that means equitable access to health care, safety, education and employment. It also means taking concrete action against domestic violence, wage gaps and all forms of discrimination.
I would like to point out that our Liberal caucus is almost at parity, with 40% of our team of parliamentarians being women.
Some hon. members: Hear, hear!
Linda Lapointe: Mr. Speaker, there is still a lot of work to be done in the House of Commons, where, unfortunately, only 30% of elected members are women.
I would also like to draw the attention of the House to another point raised in the throne speech: We must not overlook the tax cut scheduled for July 1. It will have a significant impact on Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. By reducing the tax rate by 1%, this measure will provide more than 22 million Canadians, including middle-income and lower-income families, with up to $825 in annual tax relief for a two-income family. Families are struggling to cope with the cost of living, especially the cost of housing and food. This tax cut will provide financial relief to the people of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles and will boost their purchasing power.
As for housing, the government has made an ambitious but necessary promise to build 500,000 housing units a year across the country. The real estate market in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles is under a lot of pressure. Young families are struggling to buy a home. Seniors are in need of adapted housing, and tenants are paying higher and higher rents. Everyone needs affordable, accessible, well-situated housing. Everyone deserves to live with dignity.
I will ensure that Rivière-des-Mille-Îles receives its fair share of these investments. Obviously, we need to build homes, but we also need to renovate existing homes, densify cities in a smart way and protect neighbourhoods from speculation.
I also want to work on getting infrastructure grants for my riding. When I had the privilege of representing Rivière-des-Mille-Îles from 2015 to 2019, I attended our government's launch of the metropolitan Montreal light rail public transit project, known as the REM. One line of this project will connect Montreal to Deux‑Montagnes, in my riding. I hear that that line is expected to open this fall. That is great news. I invite the Speaker to come and try out our light rail. I would be pleased to ride the train with him.
Another topic in the throne speech that caught my eye was protecting supply management. Our farmers, livestock breeders and food processors depend on the supply management system. It ensures stable prices, consistent quality and food security. Supply management also shields our family farms from the uncertainties of global markets. I will oppose any attempt to dismantle it through trade agreements. Food sovereignty is also a matter of national security.
Trade relations with the United States require vigilance and resilience. Trade tensions with the United States are having a direct impact on my riding, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. Companies like Nova Bus, which manufactures electric buses, and Damotech, which designs industrial safety systems, are being affected by the tariffs and the uncertainty. Even O'Sole Mio Foods, a source of local pride, is feeling the effects of this trade war.
We need to stand up for our businesses while opening new markets with our allies, including those in the G7, Europe, Asia and Latin America. They are strategic partners for our economic future. It is also time to remove interprovincial trade barriers. Why is it harder to sell a product made in Saint‑Eustache in Ontario than in California? This economic anomaly needs to be fixed.
The Speech from the Throne also highlighted the idea of defending our Arctic sovereignty. Canada must assert its sovereignty in the Arctic. Global warming is opening up new shipping routes and fuelling foreign interest in the region. We need to be ready. That means responsibly increasing our military spending so we can modernize our equipment, support our troops and protect our territory.
Dental care is another important component of the Speech from the Throne. The new dental care program will save eight million Canadians about $800 per year. It is a concrete measure that improves health, reduces inequality and eases the financial burden on families. More than 10,000 people in my riding had benefited from it as of January 2025. I had the privilege of joining the Hon. Marie‑Claude Bibeau in meeting with the residents of Domaine Chénier in Saint‑Eustache in the spring of 2024 to talk about the program. The residents were thrilled. I know that it is making a huge difference in Rivière‑des‑Mille‑Îles.
In closing, Boisbriand, Deux‑Montagnes, Saint‑Eustache and Rosemère are four cities that form one community, a strong, resilient and proud community. Together, we can build a future where our two official languages are protected and our culture is celebrated.
[English]
We are united for the future. Together we can build a future where our rights are protected and our economy is strong. Our national anthem so powerfully says, “strong and free”, and that is how we move forward.
Mr. Speaker, one thing the King talked about in the Speech from the Throne is getting Canada to be an energy superpower. I am just wondering how the member opposite sees that and if Alberta will play a key part in that role.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, as I am sure the hon. member knows, the Prime Minister is meeting with all the provincial and territorial premiers today. I hope that together, they will find a way to continue building a stronger, fairer Canada.
Mr. Speaker, this is my first time speaking in the 45th Parliament, so I just want to take a moment to thank the people of Montcalm for giving me for a fourth term. I want them to know that I will strive to meet their expectations.
My colleague talked about the dental care program. This insurance program absolutely needs to be expanded. However, I have here a unanimous motion from the National Assembly. She talked about the 44 members from Quebec in the House who will stand up for Quebec's interests. This motion was adopted unanimously by the MNAs of Quebec from all parties. They said that they wanted the right to opt out of dental insurance with full compensation so they could improve their own plan.
Are the 44 members going to represent the voice of the National Assembly here in the House?
Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, more than 10,000 people in my riding have benefited from the dental care plan. That is a lot of people. It is making a difference. It is making a difference for many seniors who could not afford new dentures. Dentures are quite expensive. I am pleased to see that people have been able to benefit from it.
As for the 44 members who represent Quebec, I would like to say to my hon. colleague that we are at the decision-making table. We are going to be able to advocate for Quebec. We are going to keep moving forward all the time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on her speech and on her return to the House. Over the past few years, she has been there for us, day in and day out. Now, she will be able to focus on her constituents once again. I congratulate her.
In her speech, she mentioned the importance of fighting for women's rights. We see what has happened in the U.S. since Roe v. Wade was struck down. We also see how hard it is for the Conservatives to pick a side. They did everything they could to prevent one of their own from testifying before the Standing Committee on Justice.
I would like my colleague to reiterate the importance of supporting women's rights in all spheres of life.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Sherbrooke. I appreciate her kind words. Yes, I enjoyed supporting my party colleagues for five years, but I have to say that supporting my constituents in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles is what truly warms my heart.
Some issues resonate with us more than others. I would say that, for me, those issues are official languages and women's rights. They are very important to me. There is a wind blowing from south of the border. We need to counter that and ensure that we maintain and improve our rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This is still a sensitive issue and things could easily change.
I will be there to continue speaking up for women's rights. I have two daughters. I have a granddaughter. I have daughters-in-law. To me, that is very important. All of this was passed down to me by my mother, who is a feminist.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, as anyone who has been in private business knows, the two things we look for the most are predictability and stability. We have a Prime Minister now who cannot even be bothered to bring in a budget. I wonder what the hon. member across the aisle thinks of that.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I have to admit that I thought my time was up, so I am not sure what issue the member was talking about, but I can talk about Rivière-des-Mille-Îles and about how proud I will be to represent all of my constituents. I will continue to be a member of this House.
I hope that members across the way will work with the government to advance all of these very important issues, including tariffs and the trade war.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise and speak to the throne speech.
I will be splitting my time with the member for South Surrey—White Rock.
I want to address a point that was just raised across the way in regard to the budget. We have had a number of Conservatives raise the issue of why there is no federal budget. I would ask them to reflect back to when Stephen Harper became the prime minister of Canada. When he became prime minister, it was in the month of February. Months went by before he actually presented a budget. I believe he took office in February and, in May, he presented the budget.
Canadians, in a very wise fashion, made a decision to elect a prime minister who understands the importance of the economy and the budget. Canadians are not surprised that it takes time. The election occurred on April 28. To get an appreciation of the billions and billions of dollars that are being spent and come up with an actual budget takes a bit of time. With a new government, we can anticipate a budget, and the Prime Minister has taken a very keen interest in this.
After all, the Prime Minister has been very clear what the priority of the Government of Canada is. We saw that in one of the very first actions he took. We all know what he did. He gave a tax break to millions of Canadians, and it is a significant tax break. Hundreds of millions of dollars are going back into the disposable incomes of all Canadians. His first action taken was to provide a tax break to Canadians, thereby addressing one of the major concerns that was coming out of the federal election, that being affordability.
The other concern, which I have had the opportunity to raise on the floor before, is in regard to the whole issue of Canadian sovereignty and the opportunities for us to ensure we are creating the types of jobs that are critically important and preserving the jobs that are already here. There are legitimate concerns in regard to a number of industries throughout our country.
Let us take a look at what, during the election, I heard constantly at the doors: the issues of Trump, trade, tariffs and taxes. Those were the issues that were being discussed at the doors. They were contrasting Pierre Poilievre, the Conservatives and the far right to the Prime Minister and what he had to offer. We can take a look at their bios.
I mentioned something the other day. Many would argue I am somewhat of a career politician. So is Pierre Poilievre. However, Canadians wanted someone who has a greater depth of understanding of the economy. The Prime Minister was the governor of the Bank of Canada. He was chosen by Stephen Harper, the then prime minister. He was the governor of the Bank of England. He understands how an economy works, second to no other. He made a commitment to build the Canadian economy and to make Canada the strongest of the G7 countries on a per capita basis. That is the reason he is meeting with the premiers today. He recognizes that, in order to build one Canadian economy, we need to see premiers come onside.
From my perspective, this is interesting. I have a sister who lives in Ontario. I have a brother who lives in Saskatchewan. I have two sisters who live in Alberta. I have a brother who lives in British Columbia. When I talk to them collectively, they understand why it is so important that we operate as one economy. As a government, it would be nice to see this and the types of actions that have been very encouraging.
I was never really a big fan of Doug Ford, but I am really quite inspired by a number of things that he is doing in terms of working with the Premier of Manitoba, Wab Kinew, and in terms of Saskatchewan. I understand he is reaching out to Atlantic Canada also. We are seeing a much higher sense of co-operation coming from the provinces in dealing with the trade barriers. It is estimated that we could see a savings of $200 billion if we can get the provinces and the federal government working together. That is what Canadians want.
It does not matter what region. Whether they are from Atlantic Canada, Quebec, Ontario, the Prairies, the west coast or up north, they want to see political parties working together. They want to see the different levels of government working together to deliver for Canadians. That is what we should all be pushing for.
I am concerned, as it does not seem that the Conservative Party has turned the page. They want to continue on from where they left off back in November and December. If anything, what I have witnessed, based on a few of the speeches that I have heard, is that the Conservatives have moved further to the right. It is crazy, some of the things that we hear coming from across the way.
At the end of the day, there is value. The Conservatives should read the throne speech, and they will see a great deal of value there in terms of advancing the Canadian economy but also recognizing the importance of social programs. Where are the Conservatives on some of those programs? Today I heard one of the Conservatives say, “Well, X, Y and Z is happening in health care.” He was blaming Ottawa, even though it is the provinces that administer health care.
I have good news for that particular member, because never before have we seen this level of federal dollars flowing into health care in our provinces. I would like to see some changes to the Canada Health Act, from a personal perspective, things such as more accountability and financial accountability. Maybe there are some things we can do, but let us recognize the fact that health care, from an administrative point of view, is dealt with through the provinces.
When we take a look at the potential there, we had a Bloc member stand up and be critical because, instead of having the dental program, which is actually helping thousands of people in the province of Quebec and hundreds of thousands throughout the country, the Bloc member said, “Just give us the money.” Ottawa is nothing more than an ATM machine for members of the Bloc. That is not good enough.
We all have responsibilities, and our constituents want us to be working harder, together, as more of a unified force. I believe there are many things we can work on together. First and foremost, over the next period of time, what is it going to take for us to build that one economy? The House of Commons has a role to play, and part of that role is to ensure that we get legislation through the House before we adjourn later this month.
If members want to contribute to a team Canada approach and deliver for Canadians, one of the things we have to do, and it is not an option, is to deliver on some of the legislative initiatives that are going to be proposed. Those legislative initiatives that we are talking about are a reflection of what Canadians have been telling all of us, collectively, at the door. We came out of an election just a month ago. That is what the legislative agenda, in the short term, is all about.
We expect to see support from other members of the House. In a minority situation, it is not an option. We need to have opposition members come onside. If members genuinely believe in a stronger, healthier one economy, for example, there is some legislation there. If members are concerned about the issue of what is happening at our borders, there is going to be legislation there.
These are the types of initiatives that are going to make a difference in the day-to-day lives of Canadians, and the opposition parties have a moral obligation to get behind and support some of this legislation. Maybe they could look at ways in which it could be improved. I am not saying members cannot be the opposition. By all means, they should be an opposition and be constructive in their criticism, but they should also recognize that, as a House of Commons, we need to pass legislation. I look forward to that.
Mr. Speaker, first of all, this is my first time speaking in the House. It is nothing less than a privilege. This is my second week, and I am hearing this member on the other side of the House. I literally love him, but that is not the question. He is trying to sell us a fancy menu without telling us the price of the items that he wants to sell us on that menu. The issue is that, if he wants members of the CPC or the Bloc to support the Liberals, we need to know what we are doing to support that and where the Liberals are going to take us.
The second thing I am failing to understand is that, it is the second week, and the Liberals have not provided us with the definition of “one economy”. They are circumventing it, and they have not provided it, despite the fact that we have a diverse economy. Different provinces have different economies. How are the Liberals going to accommodate those?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the principles of the question being posed. There are issues there that are very tangible.
For example, one of the first initiatives was the tax break for Canadians, which I made reference to. I would think that the Conservatives would be onside and that we would not have a problem in passing that, but I do not take that for granted because the first time we attempted that was back in 2015, and members will recall that the Conservatives actually voted against that tax break.
When I refer to working “onside”, the opposition can still be critical. Its members can still say that they want X, Y, and Z, but in terms of our delivering that tax break, I would think that the Conservative Party should actually vote in favour of it. On the legislation that would come before the House to take down some of these barriers, especially after consultation with the provinces, I would think the Conservatives would vote in favour of that also.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Winnipeg North for his remarks and for reminding us once again of our moral obligation.
I actually want to ask him about morality. Does he think that his colleague from Terrebonne has a legitimate right to be here in the House? We know that Elections Canada screwed up some mail-in ballots. We also know that, in the judicial recount, four ballots on which only Tatiana's first name appeared were allowed. I would remind the House that the Bloc Québécois lost by a single vote. Four votes would have changed the outcome. Does he think that is legitimate? The Elections Canada website clearly states that the candidate's first and last names must appear. Had those ballots been rejected, Nathalie Sinclair‑Desgagné would be the one sitting here.
Does he think his colleague's presence in the House is legitimate?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, in the last election, there were some very close calls. We had one election result where the Liberals lost by four votes. We had another one, as the member points out, where the Liberals won by one vote, or I should say that the respective candidates won and lost. I have absolute, one hundred per cent, full confidence in Elections Canada and the things Elections Canada has done.
Around the world, Elections Canada is recognized as a go-to organization when it comes to issues such as democracy and how to run a fair election. I do not think any one of us do a favour when we start attacking Elections Canada, and Elections Canada has my full support. I had to go through a recount myself. I learned things by going through those recounts, and I believe that we should accept the results that have been given—
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start, before I ask my question, by saying that members should not mention the names of other colleagues, but I do want to congratulate my hon. colleague for his re-election.
I am sure that he came back to the House with the mandate his electors gave him, as electors gave the Liberal Party, and that was a mandate to come back to talk about the tax cut, dental care and all the programs that help young families, which I am sure the member has in his riding, to have a better life in Canada. Can the member expand on that?
Mr. Speaker, I think that is a fair reflection of what the member for London West was hearing at the doors, and that is what she wants to advocate for here, whether it is on the floor of the House of Commons or in a respective caucus. People want to be able to see the issue of affordability being dealt with. It might not be resolved overnight, but the Prime Minister's first action of the tax break is going to make a substantial difference, and it is going to help her constituents, my constituents and all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to enter into debate on the throne speech. I was not anticipating that I would get to speak until tomorrow, but nonetheless, the opportunity arose, and I am at the ready.
Looking at the throne speech, the real question is, what is not in the throne speech. More to the point, when I was out campaigning, when I was talking to people in Vancouver East, there were many issues that people raised. Yes, of course, people were talking about their concern with respect to the United States and what was going on with the United States. With that being said, though, while people said we should absolutely take action together in dealing with the United States, they also said that there is another element of the threat that Canada faces, and that is foreign interference.
It is a mystery to me how it is that, since the election, we have not heard the Prime Minister raise the issue of foreign interference, the threat to our democratic institutions and our democracy. That is one thing that we must also stand together to protect as well, which we have not seen.
The foreign interference registry was something that all members of the previous Parliament, across party lines, worked together to expedite. To date, that act has not yet been enacted. We still do not have the registry up and running, so I do have a question for the government with respect to it: Why has it not been enacted, and where is it?
I want to turn to other areas absent in the throne speech, and concerns have already been raised. Seniors and their concerns were not mentioned in the throne speech. Women, for example, were not mentioned in the throne speech. Issues surrounding the impact of gender equality were not addressed in the throne speech. People with different abilities were not mentioned in the throne speech.
I was absolutely dismayed with respect to housing. There were two aspects that the government highlighted around housing, such as the GST tax break for first-time homebuyers. That was something that the NDP had pushed for and called for. It is good it is in there, but I should note that there is a major difference in the housing costs in the Lower Mainland. The cap put in place is not going to help a lot of people there.
The government also put in a piece about development cost levies and reducing them by half. Reducing development cost levies by half would mean that local governments that need the resources to build the infrastructure would not have that resource. That is still top of mind. In fact, the FCM was here last week and over the weekend. Today I ran into some of the councillors who were still in Ottawa, and they want answers. They want to know how the government is going to address the gap that will be created with the reduction of the development cost levies for the development of housing. That is a major concern for people in the community and local councillors. They do not know how they are going to make that up.
Of course, there are other infrastructure needs that are not being met as well, especially with the growing populations of communities. They were not mentioned in the throne speech.
I should note that, on housing, renters were not mentioned. It is such a bizarre thing to me. Renters are a large part of our communities and our population. Renters and their concerns were not mentioned in the throne speech. The issues that brought us to the housing crisis were the cancellation of the co-op housing program by the Progressive Conservatives in 1992 and the cancellation of the national affordable housing program by the federal Liberal government in 1993, yet a national affordable housing program and a national co-op housing program are not mentioned in the throne speech.
There is no mention of needing to invest in building social housing and co-op housing in Canada. There is no mention of the subsidies that are required to make sure that the non-profit sector has the resources it needs to manage these buildings and keep rents affordable. I do not get it.
We have a new Minister of Housing. In his first interview with the media, he said that affordability in the housing crisis is not an issue. How is affordability not an issue in the housing crisis we are faced with when affordability is the number one issue?
Last year, the FCM posted that, yes, we need to have more stock, but having more stock alone would not resolve the issue. What we need is affordability, and what that means is that we need the federal government at the table providing resources, both on the capital side in the development of social housing and on the management and operating side. Canada's affordable housing stock is sitting at below 4%, compared to at least 7% in other G7 countries. The countries that are doing well, where they do not have an affordability housing crisis, are at 20%.
I know Pierre Poilievre thinks that community housing is somehow Soviet-style housing. I hope the Liberals do not think that. I hope they will counter that narrative and say that Canada will invest in social and co-op housing and that Canada will bring back subsidies to reduce the cost of housing.
There is a whole spectrum of need with respect to housing. There are those who are unhoused, those who are low-income renters who need subsidized housing, those who need low-income market rental, those who need some support with a moderate income in the market and those who want to get into the market for the first time to own their own home.
For people who want to get into the market to own their own home for the first time, they need the government to address housing profiteering. Those are the actors who come in to evict people so they can jack up the rent because their number one goal is to maximize profit. They are not thinking about how to keep rent low or housing costs low. They are thinking about how to stuff their pockets and how to get the most return for their investment. Therefore, we need to address the financialization of housing, and there is nothing in the throne speech that speaks to that.
I would like to move an amendment to the amendment because I think the other part that needs to be dealt with is the issue of indigenous rights. To that end, I move:
That the amendment be amended by adding the following: “, as well as Indigenous peoples”.
Mr. Speaker, we heard a lot about different kinds of housing challenges in the member's riding and across Canada, and the pressures that private sector and other players have in that. Is the ideal housing market, as a well-functioning housing market, one that has a multiplicity of operators, or is it one where it is just the public sector providing housing?
Mr. Speaker, with respect to housing, the reality is this: There is a continuum of need, and trying to focus on the model of just relying on the private sector to deliver the housing that Canadians need has failed. For the last 30 years, that is what successive Liberal and Conservative governments have relied on. Guess what, Mr. Speaker? We have a major housing crisis in Vancouver East and all across the country.
We have to get back to having the federal government at the table as a true partner: a partner with local governments, indigenous governments and provincial governments; a partner with the non-profit sector; and yes, a partner even with the private sector. However, we have to build social housing to the degree it is needed and build co-op housing to the degree we had previously, without which we have this housing crisis. Reliance on just the private sector would only yield housing profiteering. This is what we are faced with.
Mr. Speaker, on the issue of housing affordability and attainability, I think we can all agree there is a crisis in this country. One area in which we need to address that is obviously in the case of a federal budget. We have not had a federal budget in the last 18 months. Members will recall the fiasco that went on with the fall economic statement being tabled by the then House leader, not even by the then finance minister, because she had resigned that day.
Does the hon. member agree that in the absence of a federal budget, it is difficult for us as parliamentarians to understand not just how the government is going to spend its money but also where that money is going to come from?
Mr. Speaker, there is one thing I am very worried about in the throne speech. The Prime Minister actually talked about reducing spending and capping it at 2% increases. That is a 7% cut, which would mean cuts to public services. There is no question about it. No amount of efficiencies will make up that gap.
That is on top of the Prime Minister making the comment and the commitment that Canada would boost military spending to the 2% of GDP that NATO has requested. That is at least $20 billion to $25 billion of additional spending. My question is this: Where is the money going to come from? Yes, we need to see the budget.
My point on housing is this: The Conservatives need to stop with the rhetoric that social housing and co-op housing are Soviet-style housing. Social housing and co-op housing are types of housing that Canada needs for our community, and it is time for them to get on board.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I agree with my NDP colleague that the housing crisis is a terrible thing, in Quebec and Canada alike. This is everyone's business.
Just yesterday, I learned that some 17,000 people in Manitoba have been evacuated because of wildfires. That is another 17,000 people who need somewhere to live. Meanwhile, the government's response to these wildfires caused by climate change is to buy another pipeline so Canada can export more oil.
Does my colleague think that makes sense, or should we be focusing on climate change instead and redirecting our efforts toward green energy instead of selling oil, when we know the consequences of that?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I absolutely agree with the member. We have to face the climate crisis head-on, not pretend it is not here and not having an impact on our community. Sticking our head in the sand is not going to solve the crisis.
We have a forest fire going on in our communities right now, and people are losing their homes. In my own community of Vancouver East, during the heat dome, people died. People went to live in the parks and set up encampments because they could not survive in the face of the heat dome, so we had better get on board with it.
Talking about expediting the oil and gas sector, development and so on without thinking about the climate crisis would be putting all of Canada in jeopardy, including Quebec.
Before we go to resuming debate, it is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, Ethics; the hon. member for Newmarket—Aurora, Finance; the hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, Natural Resources.
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Saint-Laurent.
I have the tremendous honour of standing here today because of the unwavering support and trust that has been bestowed upon me by the people who are the heart of the riding of Peterborough. From the first nations communities of Hiawatha and Curve Lake to true small-town Canada in Lakefield, Ennismore, Norwood, Havelock, Bridgenorth and Keene, just to name a few, which are home to a vibrant and growing farming community, and to the bustling city centre of Peterborough, which is home to an incredible art scene and world-class education at Trent University and Sir Sandford Fleming College, the people who call the riding of Peterborough home know how fortunate we are to live, work and play in such a beautiful place.
It was no surprise that no amount of rain, snow or even an ice storm that knocked the power out for over a week and created a state of emergency was able to derail the monumental efforts made by our campaign team and hundreds of volunteers, who all joined our campaign very quickly and with great determination because of the unity and positivity we displayed. The stories people so generously shared with me, and continue to share, will be with me and guide me to do what is best for my community and to be their voice. A “thanks” will never be enough to truly show the people of Peterborough how much their support means to me.
I was raised on my family's farm in the rural part of my riding. What a gift it was to be raised on a farm in rural Ontario, learning often and very young the lessons of caring for others before ourselves and staying the course even when all odds seem stacked up against us, as well as that there is no substitute for hard work and dedication. I know that when our communities rally together, there is not anything we cannot accomplish.
Rural Ontario is still the place I call home. I am proud to be able to call myself a third-generation farmer. My husband serves our community as a paramedic; together we are raising our three children while rebuilding my family's farm. Our youngest, my daughter, was born just nine months ago. From the outside looking in, it may not be the ideal time for my family for me to be here. However, my husband and I agreed that I could not sit idly by at a time when the call from our community and country was so loud to find people who know the incredible potential Canada has and to elect those who are ready to move Canada forward for all Canadians. People are called for who will not only listen but act and will work tirelessly to make sure all Canadians know that they are supported. I can assure members that I did not think I would ever be standing here, but the privilege and responsibility are not lost on me for a moment.
Today, I have chosen to share with the House a bit about my father. My father passed in 2010 of pancreatic cancer. He was a farmer and a skilled tradesman. He was very proudly a member of the International Union of Operating Engineers. He was a cutting-equipment mechanic who spent much of his life travelling northern Ontario and many parts of Canada. Even now, I can still feel what the atmosphere of the farm felt like when he received a call to head north or out west. Another telltale sign was his signature one grape-tipped Colts cigar, which he seemed to reserve for the excitement of his next adventure. He loved the work of being a highly sought-after mechanic, seemingly able to fix everything. There was no machine too big or too small. He would always return home to the farm and would love to share stories of his time away.
I speak about this today because I have witnessed the pride that comes with working in the skilled trades. The skilled trades create opportunities for well-paying, meaningful work that supports Canadian families. My father had the opportunity to be part of projects of national significance that gave him and my family a physical, lasting legacy in the landscape of Canada now that he is gone.
I know that skilled trades have been overlooked and underappreciated for too long. However, I stand here today knowing that our new government knows that when Canadians come together, Canada builds things that last. We will build hundreds of thousands of careers in the skilled trades. Skilled-trades workers will continue to be at the forefront of tackling the housing crisis. They will build projects of national importance and proudly play an instrumental role as we build the strongest economy in the G7.
We must take these opportunities to build and protect the future for our children, to make sure families have what they need to help shoulder the growing issues of affordability. As we continue to build our economy, our government will protect the programs that are helping families, such as child care, pharmacare and the expansion of the Canadian dental care plan, which are saving families thousands of dollars every year. Our middle-class tax cut would be a welcome addition in helping Canadians who are struggling to get ahead.
Residents in my home of Peterborough were ready to have a member of Parliament who would listen to them and be their voice in Ottawa. They understood that we must seize the opportunity for renewal that we have as a country. They know, as we do, that we have an opportunity to think big and to act bigger.
I look forward to collaborating with all members of the House to move Canada forward into the strong and prosperous potential it has always had. I believe that across our beautiful country, the people who elect us to be here are expecting the same from all of us. I am thankful to my husband and family for supporting me so that I can be here, helping build a future all Canadians deserve.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on her election. I listened to her speech very carefully. I also lost a grandfather a couple of years ago. He was like my father, and I very much sympathize with what she told the House today. I am also well familiar with Peterborough and the very many families she represents, who sound much like the member's family.
The member recognized the affordability crisis her constituents are going through right now. Given that, is a tax cut worth $20 a month going to make any material difference in their lives? Should it not be a greater tax cut to help her constituents?
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to hear about the member's grandfather. Cancer is a terrible, terrible disease that affects Canadians all across our country and around the world. I really empathize with anyone who has been through dealing with such a terrible disease. I am thankful for the member's words.
Our new government is committed to helping with the affordability crisis, and it is a great start. We hope the member will support, moving forward, that we need a middle-class tax cut for Canadians and that every little bit does help at this point. We absolutely need to do more. I do not disagree with the member, but I think it is a fabulous start.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I was moved by my colleague from Peterborough's intervention.
I also lost my father, in 2011. He loved his cigars, too, Panters if memory serves me correctly. I thank her for this duty to remember. It is important in the House. Remembering where we come from gives a great deal of meaning to our actions here in the House.
We are here to debate an issue on which an agricultural producer or someone who has worked in the agricultural sector would like a stand to be taken: supply management. I think it goes without saying that everyone wants to keep supply management. However, are we going to keep the entire system or are parts of it going to be sacrificed again? Could my colleague from Peterborough be an ally and support the Bloc Québécois bill to fully protect supply management?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, yes, we will unequivocally support the Bloc's bill and support supply management, including for our wonderful farmers in Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating my hon. colleague for winning her election in Peterborough, and I am sure she will serve the residents of Peterborough well.
In her speech, the member spoke about the importance of skilled trades and shared a very compelling personal story. Could she expand further on why supporting the skilled trades is so critical at this moment for both workers and our economy?
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful to my lovely new friend and colleague from Don Valley North.
The skilled trades are vital to any country and to building anything that is meant to last and is meant to support our economy and the people who live in our country. It is also a meaningful job.
My brother is a member of the International Union of Operating Engineers, and that was his goal for his life, watching my father also be in that union. It is meaningful work that pays really well and does support families. As we put forth our commitments to build projects of national significance, we will need to continue to build our workforce, especially in the skilled trades, because we do not have nearly enough of those workers.
Mr. Speaker, in the absence of a budget, the main estimates came out last week, and they said there would be a 37% increase, to $26 billion a year. That will cost the average family about $1,400 in consultant fees. This is on top of the fact that the bureaucracy has grown almost 50% under the government.
Does the hon. member not think there is a disconnect there, that we basically have a tax cut that is going to reduce the amount of taxes by the cost of a cup of coffee a week, yet on the back end of that, it is going to cost each Canadian family $1,400 a year for new consultants? Is that not a disconnect in her view?
Mr. Speaker, we look forward to presenting our budget this fall. I am from a place where we are taught to measure twice and cut once, and that is just what we will do. We will take our time. In an ever-changing world and economy, we need to do our due diligence to make sure we are putting every dollar forward that is best for Canadians.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, it is with a profound sense of duty that I rise today on behalf of the riding of Saint-Laurent to express my support for the Speech from the Throne.
Let me take a moment to sincerely thank the voters who gave me the honour of representing them in the House of Commons for a fourth term. It is a great honour to once again serve the community that watched me grow up and that I have always been happy to call home.
[English]
I want to take a moment to thank my team and the many volunteers, whose determination and long hours contributed to this success. I also want to thank my family for their unwavering support through it all. They truly make it possible for me to continue this important work.
The 45th Parliament begins at a pivotal moment for our country. The world around us is changing rapidly, and the values that define us as Canadians are more important than ever. At a time when the principles of democracy and pluralism are being tested around the world, Canada stands firm, strong and free, united in our resolve to protect our sovereignty and defend the rights of our people.
In his address to Parliament, His Majesty King Charles III reminded us that Canada is uniquely positioned to lead, as we have the resources and expertise the world needs and the values the world respects. Our government stands ready to meet this challenge. We are taking bold steps to create one strong Canadian economy, not 13, by removing interprovincial trade barriers, barriers to trade and mobility, a process already under way that can help us add $200 billion to our annual GDP. By doing so, we are not only strengthening our internal market but also boosting Canada's role on the global stage.
To build on this progress, our government is investing $5 billion through the new trade diversification corridor fund to modernize and expand the infrastructure that connects Canadian businesses to the world. This will help Canada produce Canadian products and reach markets faster, while helping us build stronger relationships with like-minded nations and create high-quality jobs right here at home. With our plan, Canada has the potential to emerge stronger than ever before.
[Translation]
While it is important to build a strong and resilient economy, Canadians also need to feel safe in their communities. To successfully build a safer Canada, we will strengthen border security by giving law enforcement and intelligence agencies the necessary tools to halt the flow of fentanyl and its precursors and prevent illegal weapons and drugs from coming into our neighbourhoods.
[English]
This will be reinforced through the deployment of drones, helicopters, additional CBSA personnel and canine teams. Additionally, we will change firearms licensing and strengthen enforcement of yellow- and red-flag laws. One thing I am particularly pleased about is that those people convicted of intimate partner violence and those subject to protection orders will have their weapons licence removed. Furthermore, in the throne speech, we commit to toughening the Criminal Code to make it harder for repeat offenders charged with committing crimes such as car theft, home invasions, drug smuggling and human trafficking to get bail.
[Translation]
International partnerships also strengthen Canada's security.
That is exactly why we are joining ReArm Europe and working closely with allies who share our values to build resilient global alliances.
What is more, we will rebuild, rearm and reinvest in our Canadian Armed Forces to protect our sovereignty, while strengthening our presence in the north at a time when this region is facing new threats.
Through these efforts, Canada will work proactively and continue to be a beacon of stability on the world stage.
[English]
Canada now stands at a unique crossroads, with a real opportunity to shape the future of the western world within the G7. Guided by values that resonate far beyond our borders, we are moving forward with confidence, ready to act with ambition, clarity and conviction. Our global leadership goes hand in hand with a strong focus on building a better future for Canadians here at home.
One of the major concerns of Canadians in my home riding of Saint-Laurent, which was raised at dozens of doorsteps throughout the election campaign, is the issue of housing affordability. To help make life more affordable, our government is eliminating municipal development charges on multi-unit projects and cutting the GST on homes under $1 million, bringing down costs and accelerating construction. We are also doubling the pace of homebuilding across the country through the “build Canada homes” program and strategic investments in modular and prefabricated housing.
By leveraging Canadian technology, Canadian lumber and the skills of Canadian workers, we are creating good-paying jobs and laying the foundation for long-term economic growth.
[Translation]
We are determined to keep our commitment to supporting Canadian families in their daily lives. As such, we will continue our efforts to build affordable housing and create good jobs. We are reducing the tax burden by lowering taxes for the middle class and saving two-income families up to $840 a year, while continuing to offer essential programs, such as child care, pharmacare and dental care. Eight million Canadians are benefiting from the Canadian dental care plan, which helps families save thousands of dollars a year. This plan will make dental care more affordable and improve access to essential care for many families and seniors in Saint-Laurent.
[English]
I would not want to end my speech without referencing our government's commitment to environmental protection, as nature is an important part of Canada's identity. At COP15, held in Montreal, we struck an agreement with 196 countries to protect 30% of our lands and 30% of our waters by 2030. Through the throne speech, we have committed to protecting more of Canada's land and water than ever through the creation of new national parks, national urban parks, marine protected areas and other conservation initiatives.
[Translation]
Canada has what it takes to be a leader. In this period of global uncertainty, we are firmly on the right track.
[English]
By choosing to invest in our people, safeguarding our communities and deepening partnerships abroad, we are ensuring that Canada not only meets today's challenges but also emerges stronger as an innovator for tomorrow. Let us move forward together, united in purpose and dedicated to building a brighter future for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government, which, in my view, has been the same Liberal government for the last 10 years, always talks really tough when it comes to improving community safety and addressing concerns of Canadians from coast to coast. I heard daily during this particular election period that Canadians are simply fed up. I know that police chiefs are fed up. I know that premiers are fed up with the government's lack of commitment to make meaningful change.
I listened very carefully to the throne speech, and I would like to ask a question about the renewed focus on car theft and home invasions by toughening the code in order to make bail harder. That is such a vague concept. I know, as a former prosecutor, that one way to make bail harder is to completely remove the principle of restraint.
Is the member committed to repealing Bill C-75, which allowed the catch-and-release phenomenon Canadians are seeing every single day?
Mr. Speaker, we obviously have new leadership here at the Liberal Party, and we have a renewed focus. We are planning on making communities safer, and there are a slew of measures that will be introduced. One of them, as I mentioned in my speech, is that we will make bail harder to get for people who are accused of crimes and found guilty, including reoffenders of car theft and home invasion, etc. Of course, I believe that our government will find the best way forward in order to make sure we are tackling the issue.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, there were about 40 Liberal MPs between 2015 and 2019, including five ministers. That did not stop the Liberals from buying Trans Mountain, in spite of Quebec's environmental views.
In the last Parliament, there were about 30 Liberal members from Quebec. That did not stop the Liberals from going against a unanimous motion from the National Assembly that called on the federal government to give Quebec its fair share for the dental care insurance program. Since the RAMQ was already administering part of that care, this would have allowed it to improve its own plan. The Liberal members let their government do as it pleased.
How can we be sure that the 44 current members from Quebec will not continue to represent the government to Quebeckers instead of representing Quebeckers to the government?
Mr. Speaker, Quebec members are very strong voices for their communities. We are here for the well-being of Quebeckers, and we are doing what we can within our government to improve the well-being of Quebeckers.
Our government is working with all the provinces and territories to find how best to make life better and more affordable for all Canadians across the country.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the member actually referenced the Speech from the Throne and some of what was actually in it.
Constituents in the riding of Waterloo were really pleased to hear the sustainable jobs plan mentioned. They were pleased that there was a vision for the country that we could build upon, recognizing that we are stronger when we work together rather than when we are apart.
I would like to hear from the member, when it comes to her constituency and constituencies across the country, what she is hearing from constituents. Do they echo the comments from the Conservatives, which seems to be very gloomy? We see that there are no smiles on the other side. It is a really tough day, especially when their leader cannot win his own seat. However, I do think it is important we recognize that Canadians are giving a message, and I would like to hear from the member what she believes that message is.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians in my riding were quite hopeful throughout the campaign. They saw a renewed hope within our country, and they saw a lot of opportunity for improvement as well.
While there were many challenges over the last few months, and new challenges brought by other countries, I think this offers a very unique opportunity for Canada to be very strong, and a very strong leader in the G7 and in the world. I think Canadians want us to step up to the plate and do whatever we can to make sure we remain in that position of strength, continue to create good-paying jobs for Canadians and continue to be there for Canadians who need us the most by continuing to offer the programs we had going on for several years.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to clarify something with you.
When our colleague from Vancouver East took the floor earlier, she did so as an independent member. According to the order of speakers, she was 45th. She spoke and proposed an amendment. You then recognized the member for Saint-Laurent, who would therefore have been 46th in line. I just want to make sure that this is considered as such. Otherwise, this puts all those who spoke before the 45th speaker at a real disadvantage.
In short, can you confirm that your interpretation is that the member for Vancouver East spoke as an independent member when she was the 45th speaker?
I thank the hon. member for Rivière-du-Nord for his comments.
[English]
It was the second half of a Liberal spot, which the member for Vancouver East took. We are still early in the sitting, so some members are still adjusting to when they are going to rise or not rise. The interpretation from the Chair is that it was the second half of a Liberal spot, and so the remaining positions will carry on as they were, with spot 45 remaining an independent spot at this point.
The hon. member for Rivière-du-Nord has the floor.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, thank you for ruling on the matter. However, I would submit that the rules state that when we share our time with another member, we must state that at the beginning of our speech. Our colleague from Winnipeg North announced that he was sharing his time with another member of the Liberal Party. He never mentioned the member for Vancouver East. If we stick to this interpretation, it seems to me that she should not have been recognized. The only way to legitimize her turn to speak is to place it where it should have been, which, according to the order, is 45th.
[English]
I thank the member. There is some discretion on that; it does change from time to time. I believe the chief government whip wishes to intervene briefly.
Mr. Speaker, just for clarification, I believe it to be the case when sharing a spot that, although customary, it is not actually necessary for us to indicate who we are sharing it with. The only thing that is necessary is to indicate that we are sharing it. The individual we are sharing it with can change up until the moment they rise.
That is the interpretation of the Chair.
I have heard enough on the matter, so we will continue with the rotation, as established.
[Translation]
I thank the hon. member for Rivière-du-Nord for his comments.
[English]
I would remind all members that, going forward, we will be very cognizant when we stand and take the floor of when it is our turn to speak.
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Edmonton Riverbend.
Mr. Speaker, a way to get two rounds of applause in this place is a point of order on the other side. Also, congratulations. It is great to see you in the chair. I know you will serve us well and be fair. I wish a happy birthday to your little guy, Bennett Nater, who celebrated his birthday this past weekend.
Now that I have good favour with the Chair, I will get to the rest of my speech.
This is my first speech in this 45th Parliament, my fourth Parliament. I have spent almost 10 years in this place, and what never ceases to amaze me is the opportunity to stand up here and represent the people of Edmonton Riverbend and share, from time to time, the amount of goodwill the people there have in electing me to this place. It is something that I am incredibly proud of.
I want to take the opportunity to thank a few people from the campaign, being that this is my first speech. First of all, I would be remiss if I did not thank my lovely and beautiful wife Elizabeth, who has been with me from the start of this thing. It has been an incredible journey. She has a busy life. She is a colorectal surgeon. At times, she likes to say that she actually saves lives while we pretend we are saving lives in here. I have certainly seen a number of things we have done here together in this place that have translated into some pretty amazing and remarkable things.
Also, I want to thank my two daughters. Molly just turned 17 and is off to university next year. She was an instrumental help during the campaign, as she always is. My other daughter, Lily, who is 16, was too. They came with boyfriends this time, so there were an extra couple of hands and volunteers doing signs and logistics. I thank both Molly and Lily for continuing to support me in doing this job, which takes me away from them. Actually, Molly's graduation is this Wednesday, and unfortunately I will miss it to be here. To stand up in this place, thank them and tell them how much I love them is something that I never forget to do.
Then, of course, there is the little guy who runs our house, Hugh, who is five. He was a brand new baby who came in the last Parliament. He has sat in the Speaker's chair on a number of occasions now, and he takes over the House when he is here. Thankfully, there have been no members of Parliament here at those times, but I was able to spend time with him. He came out every day of the campaign. He door knocked with me, lit dropped with me and put out signs with me. If members are looking for more volunteers, I guess the message here is to just have kids, and they will bring volunteers with them.
Then there is my wonderful sister, Bernadette Jeneroux. She is a teacher back home in Edmonton. She has helped us tremendously through so many opportunities and has looked after our little ones.
Then, of course, there is the volunteer team. I would be remiss if I did not mention a lot of their names. At the end of the day, they are the ones who really helped get me here. They are Vera Fedor; Jason Bischoff; Carter Moroz; Norman Lorrain; Ivonne Martinez; Sohail Quadri; Sami Alam; Tania Fatmi and Christine Liu, who both work in my office; David Sparrow; Asia Parmar, the best financial agent there is; Varun Chandrasekar; Karen Stix; Alison Webster, who baked us a bunch of delicious food while we were on the campaign, and her husband John Webster; Brooke Timpson; Rob Bligh; Ash Gupta; Alex Liu; and Ravi and Sonia Dhawan. Of course, I thank my good pal Rishi Dhawan for his support and advice.
Because we have a bit of a shortened session this time around, I want to take a moment to highlight an initiative that has been important to me since being in Parliament: our annual Father's Day on the Hill initiative. We have done that for about eight years now. It raises awareness for men's mental health among young men and young fathers. Unfortunately, this time around we will not be able to do the event as we have known it before. We are doing it in partnership with the Hi Dad Foundation, a foundation that I have been a part of since we launched it about three years ago.
We continue to raise awareness for men's mental health through that, in partnership with the Mental Health Commission of Canada. I congratulate Michel Rodrigue, who is just about to celebrate his retirement. Then there is Movember and of course the member for Courtenay—Alberni. He has been a big asset in getting this off the ground.
We had previous speakers at Father's Day on the Hill. The National Hockey League Players' Association, Bryan Baeumler from HGTV, the Burlington fire department and others have come out to raise awareness for the importance of men's mental health. The statistics say that 50 Canadian men die by suicide each week. This is a problem that needs to stop and is something we need to address in Parliament.
This particular Father's Day on the Hill, instead of doing an event where we normally invite every member of Parliament and senator, we are doing a round table on men's health policy. Internationally, there are seven countries in the world that have a men's health policy: Australia, Brazil, Iran, Ireland, Malaysia, Mongolia and South Africa. Ireland blazed the trail in 2008 with its national men's health policy addressing a five-year life expectancy gap and targeting marginalized groups like travellers via the engage training program. Australia's 2010 national health policy updated the 2021-30 strategy and supports diverse groups like indigenous men, aiming for long, healthy lives.
Brazil's 2009 national comprehensive health care policy for men expanded men's health units to over 1,000 cities, focusing on primary care and reproductive health. Mongolia's 2014 strategy tackles a 10-year life expectancy disparity, while South Africa's 2020-25 plan addresses HIV, TB and mental health, aligning with UN sustainable development goals. In Europe, the 2018 strategy for the European region links men's health to SDGs, highlighting masculinity norms' impact on mental health help-seeking within the U.K. Lacking a formal strategy, it appointed a men's health ambassador in 2024 to break stigmas around men's mental health.
There are calls for a broader policy in this realm, and these are just examples that can help Canada craft legislation that prioritizes men's mental health and men's health, addresses disparity and fosters inclusivity without leaving anyone behind.
There is a centre in Edmonton called the Zebra Child & Youth Advocacy Centre, and in April, it moved into a brand new 30,000 square foot building, largely thanks to generous Edmontonian Bill Eaton. The Zebra Centre partners with the Edmonton Police Service's child protection section and child at risk response team, the Alberta RCMP, Children and Family Services, Alberta Health Services and Edmonton's prosecution services to serve children and youth who have experienced abuse, supporting them through the investigative justice and healing process. I hate that this organization exists, but I am happy that it does. Led by Emmy Stuebing, it is an incredible herd. I congratulate it and its wonderful team on its brand new facility. I am looking forward to touring the facility when I get back to Edmonton.
Finally, I thank Edmonton. From the banks of the North Saskatchewan to the farms south of the Anthony Henday, our riding has so much promise, and it really is a gem on the Prairies. We are attracting so many incredible individuals from across Canada because of our ability to show an entrepreneurial spirit in Alberta. I have been honoured to represent this city now for 13 years. We have watched it grow and establish more new families and a lot more new communities. I could not be more thankful for them allowing me to be here to represent them back home in our community. It was all just farmland when I started, but the way that Edmonton is growing, it is looking like a brand new city in south Edmonton.
The exciting thing happening right now in Edmonton is that our hockey is doing extremely well, so I would like to end my time by saying, “Go, Oilers, go.”
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to congratulate my colleague on his election and thank him for raising this incredibly crucial and important issue. I have a young 17-year-old son myself, and this is an issue we often discuss at home.
[English]
This is an issue that has been discussed with some of my colleagues in the Liberal caucus. It is a really important issue, and I thank the member for bringing it to the forefront. I hope we can collaborate on it in the future and that this can be the spirit of the kind of collaboration we can have, to lift the House and make Canada strong.
Mr. Speaker, I find that in this place, there are a lot of reasons that we get dragged into the partisanship, but at the end of the day, we are able to make friends on the other side of the aisle on like issues and policies that are able to change the country. I encourage every member to take the time to reach out on issues that are important to them and to build friendships across the aisle.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the member for Edmonton Riverbend talked a lot about Alberta's economy, how proud he is to represent his riding and how proud he is of the Oilers. Obviously, I wish him all the best in the finals.
He also talked about the Albertan economy and the province's entrepreneurial spirit. Does he actually appreciate what the Prime Minister and other Liberals are saying about creating one economy? They are ignoring economic differences between the regions as well as the need to intervene differently in Alberta, Quebec or elsewhere in Ontario. Does he support the idea of one Canadian economy?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, one thing I support about the Prime Minister is his choice of hockey team.
Since being here, I have recognized that there are a lot of similarities between Alberta and Quebec. Right now, what we are seeing is a lot of challenges in Alberta. We see in the news the talk of separation, and that is because of a lack of respect from the national government. At the end of the day, that is in the hands of the government to change.
It is good to see that there is a lot of focus on Alberta right now in the news when it comes to energy and pipelines, and I think that is something we can both continue to push forward from our respective provinces.
Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your role.
I want to commend my colleague from Edmonton Riverbend on the amazing, incredible work that he does for men who have been struggling with their mental health and all those who have been battling with their mental health. It is a very commendable field of work and is much-needed in these times.
I wonder if the member wants to comment further in regard to the struggles that Canadians are facing. I know that we put a lot of emphasis on the importance of recovery and the need for recovery-type services as they relate to mental health and addictions, but there was not much mention of that in the throne speech. I am wondering if he has any comments on how we need to get back to a recovery-based approach over harm reduction strategies when it comes to working with those struggling and battling with mental health issues and addictions in this country.
Mr. Speaker, I take any opportunity to address mental health, particularly among young men. I gave out the statistic that there are 50 suicides a week in this country by men. Also, 75% of suicides are by men, and lots of times it is young men, whom we would not think of. There is a stigma out there related to talking about it. Any chance I get, whether it is in reply to a throne speech or at an event, to speak about the importance of men's mental health, I will absolutely take.
Mr. Speaker, the issue of mental health is something we have invested a great deal in in the past. I am wondering if the member could provide his perspective on mental health within the health care system today and how it really needs to be brought to a much higher—
Mr. Speaker, the member is correct. Since COVID, we have seen an increase in people talking about mental health. We have seen an increase in people wanting to do something, but at the end of the day, we are not having these conversations here. It is also about funding. The funding needs strings attached to it to make sure that it is going right to mental health, and I hope that is what the government takes seriously.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in this chamber for the first time as the newly elected member of Parliament for Richmond Hill South, the place I have called home for the vast majority of my life. I do so with humility and deep gratitude to the people who placed their trust in me and are letting me be their voice. I thank the people of Richmond Hill. They voted for me, for change, and I will fight for that change. They can rest assured that I will fight for their families, their values, and their future every single day in this House.
My family's support means the world to me. I thank my parents for everything they have done to get me here. I thank my wife for being part of this journey so we can build a better future for our daughter. To my colleagues in the Conservative caucus, it is a tremendous privilege to stand alongside each and every one of them.
Before running for office, I was a corporate lawyer. I have four degrees from Canada's top universities, and I am licensed to practise law in Canada and the United States. I was a CFA charterholder and a partner at a major law firm. I gave that all up and entered public service not to see government grow, but to see opportunity grow and make way for bigger and prouder citizens; not to see failure excused, but to see merit rewarded; not to see Canadians divided by region, creed or conflicts abroad, but to see them united under a proud flag and behind a shared promise: the promise of a country where hard work pays off, justice prevails and the next generation inherits not less, but more.
During my election campaign, I had the opportunity to talk to many people in Richmond Hill South. Our team knocked on 100,000 doors, and I want to champion in this chamber the issues that I heard about. Unlike the Liberals, who feel no urgency to table a budget on time, I stand here today with a clear mission: to fight for policies that will restore safety in our streets, affordability in our economy, respect for our seniors and opportunity for the next generation of Canadians.
Let us start with what should be the simplest promise a government can make: to keep Canadians safe. Because of the Liberals' decade-long soft-on-crime approach, an unprecedented crime wave has been unleashed into our communities across the country. It has been keeping our communities up at night. Violent incidents, gang activities, carjackings and home invasions, often committed by repeat offenders, by the way, are becoming all too common all across Canada. Let me be clear: This is not fearmongering. It is a reality the people of Richmond Hill live with each and every day. I have spoken to seniors who do not feel safe walking to the park, to parents who worry when their kids walk to school, and to small business owners who have been robbed on multiple occasions while the criminals walk free.
Public safety must never be a partisan issue. However, under the Liberal government, a catch-and-release bail system allows repeat offenders to cycle in and cycle out of custody, all while our communities suffer the consequences. It is a system where criminals convicted of serious offences get house arrest rather than mandatory prison time, and criminals with consecutive convictions are rewarded with discounted sentences. This is an injustice and a slap in the face to the victims.
While the Prime Minister talks a big game about addressing crime, his throne speech does not mention ending the Liberal revolving-door, get-out-of-jail-free justice system. We need to restore real consequences for violent crime and stand up for victims, not criminals. Without law and order, there can be no freedom, no prosperity and no peace of mind.
However, safety is not just about crime. It is also about confronting the devastating Liberal-sponsored drug crisis, which has been destroying lives and families all across Canada. Opioid drug overdoses have risen to record levels under the Liberals' disastrous policies, claiming the lives of over 50,000 Canadians, a death toll that now exceeds that of the Second World War. The so-called safe supply policies and safe injection site experiments have utterly failed. Liberal government-supplied drugs have flooded our streets, compounding the pain and suffering of those already impacted by addictions. Decriminalizing hard drugs and giving out needles from vending machines have turned our neighbourhoods into open drug scenes where overdose deaths continue to rise, not fall. This is not harm reduction. This is government-orchestrated harm promotion.
We need a new path, a path that offers real hope, real healing and real recovery. We must focus on treatment over trauma. Solutions must be rooted in dignity, not dependency. Lastly, we must punish the fentanyl kingpins as the mass murderers they are. Every Canadian deserves the chance to rebuild their lives, and that starts with a system that helps them get off drugs, not keep them addicted.
Our streets became less safe from government-sponsored chaos, but also our economy is now in decline from a decade of Liberal vandalism. Canadians are being squeezed from every direction: groceries, gas, heating and housing. It is all going up, and people are falling behind.
The Liberal job-killing industrial carbon tax is driving up the cost of everything, especially for those who can least afford it. Farmers, truckers and working families are all paying more while the out-of-touch government offers less. This is not about reducing emissions; this is economic punishment of hard-working families that are feeling the squeeze more than ever before. We need to stop punishing work and productivity and sabotaging our country's competitiveness. That starts with axing the carbon tax for good and letting Canadians keep more of their hard-earned money. It also means addressing the deeper issue created by the Liberal government: the productivity crisis that is dragging our economy down globally and depriving working-class Canadians of a chance to get ahead.
Investment is fleeing. Productivity is declining. Factories are shutting down. Good-paying jobs are vanishing. That is not just bad for business; it is bad for workers, for wages and for our long-term growth. No Canadian should be out of work because the Liberal government refuses to get out of the way. We must unleash the potential of our economy. That means cutting Liberal red tape that chokes small businesses. It means speeding up project approval so we can develop our natural resources responsibly, build infrastructure and attract investment. It means rewarding entrepreneurship, embracing innovation and making it easier, not harder, for Canadians to build and create.
Next, we must champion pipeline development, not just as an energy policy, but as a nation-building project. We need to get our resources to market, create thousands of high-paying jobs and strengthen our energy sovereignty. It means ending the self-sabotaging and anti-energy policies, yet the throne speech makes no mention of Canada's oil and gas sector, which is Canada's most vital industry.
We need to be a country where a good idea can become a business, and a business can then become an industry; where students see a future not of delay and scarcity, but of drive and abundance; where we can make things again, build things again and grow things again, with the Canadian worker at the centre of it all. That is the difference between members on this side of the House and those opposite. Conservatives want to grow the pie for Canadians, while Liberals want to think of ways to slice it up among themselves.
Nowhere is the failure of the Liberal government's policies more obvious than in the housing market. Young couples are delaying and even forgoing starting a family because they are completely priced out. Mortgage payments and rents have doubled, while incomes have stayed flat or even declined. Young families are being priced out of their communities completely, while government funding creates more bureaucracy than housing. Plain and simple, the Liberals have orchestrated a supply crisis and perpetuated the housing hell that an entire generation is forced to endure.
We need to incentivize municipalities to build more homes faster. We need to require results and accountability, not endless reports and consultants where no strings are attached to Liberal federal funding. We need to remove the gatekeepers who delay and deny projects that Canadians desperately need. It should not take years and hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get a permit to build a home. Nurses should be able to afford to live near the hospital they work at, and tradespeople should be able to afford to live in the homes that they themselves have helped build.
People are not just angry or frustrated anymore; they are losing hope. They are suffocating. Misery is becoming the new normal. When one cannot walk down the street without fear, when housing is completely out of reach and wages are stagnant, when work is punished and bureaucracy is rewarded, our country cannot thrive.
I believe in the resilience of Canadians. I believe in the strength of our values and the promise of our future. I will fight for that Canadian promise, a country that is safe, affordable and free, a country that is not obsessed with our differences but focused on what unites us, a country where compassion is measured not by the size of the government but by the faith and strength of our communities, a country where freedom is not a gift from government but a birthright of every Canadian citizen, a country that believes in responsibility, not excuses, and in celebrating success, not sabotaging it. That is the Canada I will fight for. That is the Canada that Richmond Hill deserves. That is the Canada we will build together.
Mr. Speaker, I know a lot of my colleague's speech today was talking about planning, readiness and preparedness. It makes me think about the fires that are going on right now in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. My constituency and my riding of South Shore—St. Margarets last year had some devastating impacts from fires, both in our Tantallon area and our Shelburne regions.
Therefore, my question for my colleague is this: How does he feel about the emergency preparedness measures that are going to be impacting so many of our different constituencies, unfortunately, right now?
Mr. Speaker, let us not let the Liberals distract us from their horrible record over the last 10 years, the crime wave they have unleashed into our communities and the housing crisis they have perpetuated in the last 10 years. When I was knocking on doors during the last election campaign, that is what I was hearing. It is this housing crisis that the Liberal government has perpetuated.
I have spoken to so many young people at the doors over this election, 30-year-olds, 35-year-olds, 40-year-olds living in these beautiful single-family homes, townhomes and single detached homes. When they tell me about their issues, they do not actually live in those homes. It is their parents' homes. This is the housing crisis that the Liberals have created and that they are living in. They are gainfully employed, sometimes even working two jobs, but they cannot afford to buy a home. They have done everything that society has asked of them, but they cannot afford to buy a home.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about the fentanyl crisis, a terrible crisis that we have been discussing and working on for a year at the Standing Committee on Health. He raised the issue of treatment. We heard from experts and parents who say that relapsing is part of the recovery process.
What does my colleague think about the national strategy based on four pillars? I think we need to increase co-operation and improve its impact.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, 50,000 people have died from this opioid crisis in the last 10 years. That death toll is higher than that of the Second World War. This is the human tragedy we are talking about: the failed drug policies, the decriminalization of hard drugs, drugs like crack cocaine and fentanyl, which the Liberals have sponsored federally. With things like fentanyl, 2.5 grams of fentanyl can kill every member of Parliament. This is how lethal a 2.5-gram dose of fentanyl is, yet it is legal. We need to start locking up the fentanyl kingpins for the mass murderers they are.
Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your appointment. I would also like to congratulate this new member on a fantastic maiden speech in this chamber. He is going to bring a lot from the good people of Richmond Hill.
During the election, the government said it would do some limited bail reform. My constituents of Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna know there are huge challenges with people in what they call a catch-and-release system. Does the member agree with the Liberals, or does he think we need more than what the Liberals have put on offer?
Mr. Speaker, it is not fearmongering. This is just the reality we live in. It is a crime wave. Carjackings are up; home invasions are up; violent crime is up; gun crime is up. The Liberals sponsored this catch-and-release policy.
The flower shop I go to got robbed. The grocery store I normally go to got robbed. My dentist got robbed. My pharmacist got robbed. My optometrist got robbed, too. My neighbours have gotten robbed, and my friends have gotten robbed. Everyone has been robbed. This is a serious issue. It is time for the Liberals to finally take action.
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin.
As I rise for the first time in the House in response to the Speech from the Throne, I begin by offering my deepest gratitude to the people of Toronto—St. Paul's for their trust in electing me to their seat in the House of Commons.
[Translation]
It is the greatest honour of my life to be their voice in the House.
[English]
I want to thank the hundreds of volunteers who brought incredible energy to our campaign, like James Kingsmill, a high school student who knocked on doors almost every day after class, part of an army of engaged residents who made calls, dropped off food, hosted coffee parties and helped us speak to tens of thousands of people across the community.
To our campaign team, led by Wilder Walker-Stewart and Jonathan Afek Levy, and our local riding association, led by Brian Klunder, my thanks for their hard work, long nights and leadership of our outstanding dream team.
I want to thank my family for their immense love and support: my husband Sheamus and children Adaira, Ethan and Meghan. Making sure they grow up into a safe, prosperous and bright future inspires me every day to do this work.
I grew up around airports and airplanes in Edmonton, Alberta, as the daughter of two air traffic controllers. Whenever I see a plane overhead, I think of my parents, Doug and Helen. I thank them for their support and the values of hard work and education, not to mention calm under pressure, that they instilled in my brother, sister and me. I think of my grandma Wanda, no longer with us, who left an indelible mark on my life. She came to Canada to escape the war in Europe, built a life as a seamstress and wife of a carpenter, and was a proud Liberal. She always cared for her neighbours and kept scissors close to the newspaper so she could clip the articles she thought were important for us to read.
I am grateful every day for the life that Canada has afforded my family. It is why I ran for public office to do the work that must always be done to safeguard our country, strengthen our unity and ensure every Canadian has a bright future ahead.
Over the past 18 months, I have had the wonderful experience of connecting with so many neighbours from across Toronto—St. Paul's, from Hillcrest and Humewood to Davisville Village and the great republic of Rathnelly, from Oakwood and Little Jamaica through Cedarvale and Forest Hill, from bustling towers at Yonge and Eglinton to quiet streets nestled above Moore Park Ravine.
St. Paul's is an incredible community, one of caring, kindness and ambition. We believe in supporting our neighbourhood with vibrant farmers' markets and local small businesses that give our streets character and a strong sense of community. We share a deep love for our city and our country, and a commitment to leaving both in better shape for our children, with new green spaces, better public transit, high-quality public health care and education, and a strong economy that lifts up our quality of life. However, there are challenges. Many of our neighbours are struggling with rising rents, a lack of housing, a rising cost of living and precarious jobs. As the throne speech set out, too many families are struggling to get ahead.
We are here to deliver for Canadians. It is why our very first act as a new government is to reduce middle-class taxes, saving families up to $840 a year. We are also protecting the programs that Canadians rely on. In St. Paul's, I met seniors at St. Matthew's Bracondale House who were getting dental care for the first time in years because of our dental care program. I have met families saving upwards of $10,000 a year because of our $10-a-day child care plan. This is good for kids, good for families and good for our economy as parents, especially women, return to their careers. It is a triple crown that has already boosted our GDP.
The strongest economies are built on solid foundations of housing, education and culture. We are focused on building affordable homes to drive supply up and bring costs down. We will build across the full continuum of housing needs, from deeply affordable housing, co-ops and purpose-built rentals to a supply of new homes for young people and young families. We have major federal investments already at work in St. Paul's, building over 800 new suites across two buildings on Broadway Avenue. At St. Hilda's Towers, we are investing in 330 new affordable suites for seniors.
This is just the beginning. We need to, and we will, build many more homes. While housing is key to a strong economy, education lights the spark of economic opportunity. Twenty years ago, I had the honour of working with former premiers the Hon. Bob Rae and the Hon. Bill Davis on the Rae review of post-secondary education, to improve the quality and accessibility of Ontario's colleges and universities.
Today, more than ever, our ambition should be nothing less than to have world-leading skills and education. As the throne speech set out, the skilled trades can open the doors to good careers for hundreds of thousands of Canadians. These careers will be even better if they are connected to world-leading science and innovation: the builder who builds more homes faster at lower cost with new materials, the engineer who can harness AI and lead a team to bring it to market. Toronto—St. Paul's is home to today's innovators and entrepreneurs, and tomorrow's too.
[Translation]
We are also a community of artists, filmmakers, musicians, authors and journalists. These professions continue to tell our uniquely Canadian stories, reflect our history and open our imagination.
[English]
In the heart of Toronto, we support the arts and strong public institutions: our science centres, our art galleries, the local organizations that bring people of all ages together for theatre, crafts and fellowship. In an era of misinformation and polarization, our public broadcaster has a vital role. Let us improve the CBC-Radio Canada, not tear it down.
When I think back to when I was knocking on doors this past winter, I remember the snowbanks with hockey sticks planted in them flying Canadian flags. Canadians are ready to stand up for Canada. Yes, it is about patriotism, but as the Prime Minister has shown, it is also about respect. Respect is something we expect from our neighbours and allies. It is mutual; we give it, and we expect it in return. It is what we expect from each other. Respect for one another is a Canadian value. It is what we must demand from our political leaders. Canadians expect us to reach out to one another, to wrestle in good faith with facts, not fiction. We are at a moment of change and challenge. It is easier than ever to spread fear and hate. This is a toxic recipe for any country.
Toronto—St. Paul's, with its vibrant shuls and synagogues, is at the heart of Canada's Jewish community. The past 604 days since the terrorist attack of October 7 have been an extraordinarily difficult time of grief, anger, pain and fear. There has been, and continues to be, a very real, shocking rise in anti-Semitism in our city. As parliamentarians, as Canadians, we must ensure unequivocally that no parent is ever afraid to send their child to school, that no small business is the target of hatred and that no synagogue, place of worship or neighbourhood is targeted in an effort to make any group of Canadians responsible for a foreign conflict. This is anti-Semitism, and it is unacceptable.
As we work as a new government to make our streets safe, reduce crime and strengthen law enforcement, we will also protect schools, community centres and places of worship from acts of intimidation and fear. Freedom from fear is at the root of the Canadian commitment to democracy, pluralism and the rule of law. As we heard in the throne speech, these are values Canadians hold dear, and our government is determined to protect them.
In closing, I am here to listen, to work hard and to ensure that the voices of Toronto—St. Paul's ring out in this chamber. We all stand on the shoulders of those who came before us, and I want to pay tribute to the Hon. Dr. Carolyn Bennett, who served the community of St. Paul's for over 27 years in this House. She was a trail-blazing woman in politics and a champion of reconciliation and women's health, among her many accomplishments in a lifetime of service.
With each new Parliament, there is more work to do in this great endeavour of building a country. As Prime Minister Lester Pearson hoped when he raised the Maple Leaf flag on Parliament Hill for the first time 60 years ago this year, “Under this flag may our youth find new inspiration for loyalty to Canada; for a patriotism based not on any mean or narrow nationalism, but on the deep and equal pride that all Canadians will feel for every part of this good land.”
The road ahead may have challenges, but let us keep our eyes fixed on the horizon, towards a brighter future, a proud people and a Canada strong and free.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague across the aisle for her speech.
The member was talking about tax cuts. The carbon tax has two components, the domestic tax and the industrial tax. The current Prime Minister has taken away, paused, the domestic tax but left the industrial tax there and actually promised to enforce it or make it worse. That is the one that really hurts and drags on the middle class.
My question is: Would it not make sense to eliminate the industrial tax as well?
Mr. Speaker, first of all, in terms of the carbon tax, it is significant that it was among the first acts of this government to actually eliminate the carbon tax, delivering Canadians relief that they desperately needed.
In terms of the industrial carbon price, Canadians are supportive of policies that ensure that big polluters pay the price of pollution. I would also note that Alberta was among the first provinces, if not the first province, to introduce an industrial carbon price. It is significant that the federal government followed its lead only years later.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, from the beginning, the Liberals have been bragging about the dental care program. Basically, they are proud of the objective, which is for there to be greater coverage. Everyone agrees on that. Quebec agreed. The problem is that Quebec wanted control over that program with its fair share so that it could improve its own program, notably the RAMQ, which managed it.
What did they do? They sent it to a private company, where administrative costs run upwards of $2 billion a year.
Does my colleague think that is good management?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, as Canadians, we learn a lot from the province of Quebec. I would look to the child care program as one of the examples, where, in following Quebec's lead, we have delivered a terrific program that has saved families considerable sums when they are seeking child care. Dental care is the same type of program, where Canadians are saving upwards of $800 per year on average, getting the kind of dental care they need and have not had access to, which makes a difference in people's lives, from young people all the way to seniors.
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to welcome the member for Toronto—St. Paul's to the House. She is a true ally of the Jewish community.
In terms of what she said in her speech, just in the last 10 days, two Jews were killed in Washington, D.C., while leaving an American Jewish Committee event. We had the incident this weekend where people who were marching for the release of the hostages were attacked brutally in Colorado. In the member's riding at Casa Loma and in my riding at the Chevra Kadisha, we had demonstrators demonstrating outside Jewish community events.
What steps does the hon. member hope to take to help our community feel more safe in Canada?
Mr. Speaker, the situation we face is incredibly serious. The shocking rise of anti-Semitism that we are seeing in Canada and around the world is leading to acts of violence. My heart breaks for the tragedies we have seen in the United States in the last couple of weeks, in Colorado and in Washington.
Our first priority is to ensure that we have safe-access legislation to protect schools, campuses, places of worship and community centres. There is no room for any Canadian accessing services at these facilities in our community to have to experience the fear and intimidation that we are seeing on our streets. Following in the footsteps of some of the municipalities in Canada that are moving forward with similar types of legislation, bringing in those safe-access zones is an important priority for me as I enter this House.
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people from Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola. I want to welcome my newest constituent, Amélie Anne-Marie Brogan, and her parents Mike and Carolyn.
I welcome my colleague as well. Did she say Canadians are actually supportive of the industrial carbon tax? I just want to be clear on that.
Mr. Speaker, I said Canadians are supportive of ensuring that big polluters pay the price of polluting.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, it is my turn to rise here for the first time and deliver a speech on the Speech from the Throne.
First, I would like to thank the people of Marc-Aurèle-Fortin who sent me here by voting overwhelmingly for the Liberal Party and team Carney. I am committed to representing them to the best of my ability and to representing all citizens of this—
[English]
Mr. Speaker, we should just set the tone early on that in the chamber, members of Parliament be referred to by their ridings and not by their names.
I thank the hon. member for Waterloo.
I was going to let this one slide and correct it later. We will be using the riding name or the position of members. I will just remind all hon. members.
The hon. member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I apologize.
I would also like to thank the wonderful team of volunteers and supporters who helped us so much during the campaign. Without their efforts, I would not be in the House today. Finally, I want to thank my family. Without their support, I would not be here either, especially since this is the second time I have put them through this. I ran for provincial politics in 2014 and spent eight years in the Quebec National Assembly. I thank Marie-Hélène, André, Valérie and Claire for their support. I really appreciate it.
I also have a special word for my father, António Leitao, who would be so proud of his son today. Sadly, he passed away in 2008 after a long illness. He would have been so proud, because my father and my mother, our family, left Portugal in 1975 so that we, the children—there are five of us—could have a chance at a better life. What could be better than to see his son as a member of the federal Parliament? I would have liked him to see that, it would have been wonderful.
However, our history is not unique. Immigration happens that way all the time. Canada is immigration and immigration is Canada. When we immigrants come, we come to actively contribute to developing this country. That is what we did, the Lietao family, just like millions of immigrants when they come to Canada. Naturally, that is not to say that everything is perfect. We have to review and apply our immigration policy carefully, consistently but also and most importantly, with compassion and humanity. First and foremost, immigrants are individuals, human beings, who come here to improve their lives and contribute to the country.
To get back to the Speech from the Throne, the world has truly changed enormously in the past three, four or five months. Very briefly, here are three aspects of this change.
[English]
First of all, there has been a direct attack on the global trading system by the new administration in the United States, and this is hugely ironic because it is that new trading system that has contributed to the growth in global prosperity that small, open economies like Canada, but also an economy like the United States, benefit enormously from. It is quite ironic that the United States now intends to replace that with some hocus-pocus mercantilistic view of the world that does not really exist and is actually quite counterproductive.
Second is the unfair, abusive and totally incomprehensible tariffs that the United States' administration is imposing on Canadian exports. These tariffs may or may not remain and may or may not be extended or reinstated, but in the meantime, they create real damage and lead to a freeze in business investment. Job creation and the opening of new factories, all of that, gets delayed by the incomprehensible policy on tariffs.
Third, the United States is also rapidly sinking into what I think will become the greatest self-inflicted recession of the past 75 years. That is still important because the United States still has the world's most dynamic economy and the world's largest economy; therefore it is important for it to try to avoid that.
In conclusion, I would just like to offer the same words His Majesty said in the Speech from the Throne:
[Translation]
...Canada has continued to set an example to the world in her conduct and values, as a force for good.
Canadian values are a force for good, a lesson we must all keep passing on.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talked about the self-inflicted damage to the United States. I was just wondering about the self-inflicted damage to Canada. When the Liberals took power, there were 14 energy projects on the books, waiting for approval. Today there are none of those. There are no energy projects ready to be built. The Prime Minister has talked about making Canada an energy superpower. I would just like some comments from the hon. member.
Mr. Speaker, the likely recession in the United States will be triggered by totally misguided public policy, 19th-century public policy. The public policy we are following in this country is 21st-century public policy. I am extremely surprised to hear a true Conservative not supporting an industrial carbon price. Conservatives do support industrial market mechanisms for energy prices. I do not understand why they cannot support that.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the member for Marc‑Aurèle‑Fortin used to sit in the Quebec National Assembly, as he himself said. He knows that a unanimous consensus among all parties in the Quebec National Assembly on an issue as important as pharmacare does not happen every day. Quebec asked for full and unconditional compensation so that it could enhance its own plan.
Will the member be an ally by ensuring that this can be done, with the unanimous support of the elected representatives of the people of the Quebec nation?
Mr. Speaker, I am the first to recognize that it is extremely important that the federal and provincial governments be able to agree on how to properly fund social programs.
One example is the Canadian dental care plan. This program was implemented fairly quickly and very effectively, and it has yielded good results. As for pharmacare, discussions are still ongoing, as far as I know. If an agreement can be reached, so much the better.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague, who represents the other side of the Rivière des Mille Îles. We are neighbours, in a way. He is on the Laval side, while I am in the Lower Laurentians.
What concerns did my colleague hear while door-knocking that he was pleased to see included in the Speech from the Throne and that he believes will help us connect with our constituents?
Mr. Speaker, when we were going door to door, most of time, people had just one real concern: Which government or which prime minister would be most capable of dealing with the threat from the U.S.? That was the only concern.
The people thought about it and came to the conclusion that this Prime Minister was the person most capable of dealing with this threat from the U.S. That is what they voted for, and I think they were right.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I want to welcome my new colleague to the House of Commons. My understanding is that he is an experienced legislator. He has, I believe, served in the National Assembly of Quebec and was even the finance minister. Unfortunately, he has been overlooked for a cabinet appointment with the new government. I am a little surprised and I am wondering whether he too is surprised that after the fourth full day of debate here in the House of Commons, the government has yet to actually table any legislation. Would this have been the case if he had actually been in cabinet?
Mr. Speaker, there will be a budget. In due time, that will be presented. In fact, it is much more responsible and much more important to take the time to do the budget, rather than rushing. The members opposite seem to suggest that we should have rushed into a budget. Let us take the time. Let us do it well and let us move on from there.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the chamber on behalf of the people of Cambridge and North Dumfries, and to respond to the Speech from the Throne. As the first woman ever elected to represent this riding in Ottawa since Confederation, I carry that responsibility with deep gratitude and with a commitment to serve with heart and purpose. It is the community where I was born and raised, where I have raised my family and where I have spent my life giving back, whether by focusing on youth and seniors, supporting veterans or standing up for those who have no voice, including the victims of human trafficking.
Through the years, I have seen our community grow, from the vibrant neighbourhoods of Galt, Preston and Blair, where the Grand River and the Speed River meet, connected by bridges, to the rural areas of North Dumfries: Ayr, Clyde and Branchton. It is a place of history. It is a place of natural beauty with a shared sense of community. It is a place where neighbours support each other and where small businesses want to put down roots and grow.
Over the course of the campaign, we knocked on over 80,000 doors across Cambridge and North Dumfries. We listened on front porches, in driveways and at kitchen tables. People opened up and shared their stories, their struggles and their hopes for a better future. Along the way, I met people who have become friends, like Bonnie, whose kindness radiates in everything she does. She bakes pies and butter tarts for our local meal programs and crochets squares for blankets that help veterans settle into their new home.
I remember meeting Susan, a senior living on a fixed income. She told me how, after paying her bills, there is often not enough left to buy the groceries she needs. It made me think of my own grandmother. Our family has an old photo of her standing in front of her fridge. The door was wide open, the shelves were full, and she had a huge smile on her face. For her, that fridge was not just about food; after she immigrated to Canada from a war-torn Eastern Europe, it was a symbol of safety, of having enough and of making sure no one in her family ever went hungry again.
I also spoke with many young people, some just starting out in their careers and others finishing school, who told me they cannot see a future for themselves here. They want to stay close to family and contribute to the community they grew up in, but they cannot find jobs that pay enough to sustain them.
One young man, an engineer, told me he is considering leaving Canada altogether, looking for opportunities abroad, because he no longer sees a future for himself in the country he calls home. He wants to build a life here, but with the rising cost of living and limited opportunities, he is starting to feel as if his dream is out of reach. Despite working hard, he cannot see a path to owning a home or starting a family. He is not alone. I have spoken with many young people in our community who feel the same. They are doing everything right, yet still feel like they are falling behind.
My dad, at the age of 19, came to Canada for freedom and opportunity. The day after he arrived, he started a job as an electrician in the village of Ayr, where he was able to build that life, buy that home, and start a family. These are the very things so many young people today feel are no longer possible: that promise of a country where hard work is rewarded, rights are protected and each generation builds something better for the next. That is the promise I will help restore. That is the promise I will protect.
In many conversations, I also heard a growing sense of worry. I grew up in a neighbourhood where we could leave our door unlocked. We would head downtown to Queen's Square, sit by the fountain and enjoy an ice cream on a warm summer afternoon. It was a time when people did not think twice about their safety. Today, that sense of safety is slipping away.
Time and again, I heard people tell me they no longer feel secure, even with their doors locked. They worry about break-ins, thefts and the rise of violent crime on our streets. I spoke to parents who will not let their kids walk to the park alone anymore, to seniors who do not feel safe answering their door at night and to shop owners who have been targeted more than once.
This is not just about statistics or headlines. It is about real people in real neighbourhoods feeling unsafe in the place they call home. It is about the loss of something we all deserve: peace of mind and the freedom to walk down the street or sit by the fountain and enjoy an ice cream without fear.
There is a growing disconnect between the people and their government. At a time when many have lost faith in our institutions, the government must be reminded that it exists to serve the people, to be accountable, to be responsible and to have a plan.
At constituents' doors, I also heard a sense of hope that we can restore what has been lost, rebuild what has been broken and renew the promise of Canada. That same hope, hard work and resilience carried me through many of life's challenges and will guide me every day in the House. Those experiences did not lead me to politics; they led me to people, and people led me here.
I came to Ottawa to serve, to listen and to be a strong voice for the people of Cambridge and North Dumfries. I came here to support solutions that will build a Canada that works for everyone, a country where freedom is defended, opportunity is within reach and hope is restored. I want to help build a Canada where the promise of a better life is not just a dream but a promise every Canadian can believe in once again.
This country has given my family everything, and now I intend to give back with everything I have. I will serve with honesty; I will lead with integrity, and I will never forget who sent me here. I want to take a moment to say thanks from the bottom of my heart.
I thank my husband, Bill, whose love and support have been my constant through every challenge and every victory, for standing by me, for believing in me, even on the days when I doubted myself, and for reminding me why this work matters. I thank my two incredible daughters, who have been my inspiration from the very beginning. Watching them grow into strong, compassionate women has been the greatest gift of my life. I thank my five beautiful granddaughters; each of them is a bright light in my world. They are the reason I stand here today, fighting for a future where their dreams can take root and flourish right here at home. I thank my brother, who stood with me from the beginning, for his support and all his help. I thank my mom for her selfless love and the sacrifices only a mother makes. Everything I am began with her.
I thank the many volunteers, neighbours and friends who gave their time, energy and hearts to this campaign. This journey was not mine alone; it belonged to all of us. Every door we knocked on, every conversation we had and every moment we shared mattered, and they shaped the person I am now.
Finally, I thank the people of Cambridge and North Dumfries for sharing their stories and for welcoming me into their homes and lives. Every day in this chamber, I carry their struggles and hopes with me, humbled by the trust they have placed in me and fighting to make sure that every person can open their fridge with a smile, just as my grandmother once did.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on the theme of hope. Just over a month ago, we had just over 8.5 million Canadians vote for the Liberal Party of Canada, the new Prime Minister and a new government. I believe the messaging was very strong and tangible: We wanted to see a uniting candidate to take on Trump tariffs and trade, as well as recognition of the affordability issue. The Prime Minister has made those commitments. That is why he is in Saskatchewan today working with the premiers. That is why the first initiative he took was a major tax reduction for over 20 million Canadians.
Does the member support those two initiatives?
Mr. Speaker, my family came here with nothing and built a life, but young people today are doing everything right and getting nowhere. The promise of Canada was about believing that if we worked hard, something better was possible. That promise built families, built communities and built this country. Today, too many young people are losing faith in it. My job, our job, is to make sure that promise still means something.
These are not just my words. They are the voices of the young people in my riding who feel they have no choice but to leave their country, their families and their friends because they cannot afford to stay. They are not asking for much, just the chance to build a life, live somewhere affordable and have a job that pays enough to get them ahead. Young people need hope for the future, and it is time we give them a reason to believe in it.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Conservatives support buying pipelines. However, the government is not presenting a budget or drafting estimates, yet it is proposing to buy a pipeline to the tune of billions of dollars to produce more oil, when Canadian forests are burning as we speak. Does my colleague think this is the best way to manage affairs of state?
Climate change is having an impact both in Quebec and in Canada. There is poverty everywhere, as well as a housing crisis. Just this week, 17,000 families were ordered to evacuate due to the wildfires in Manitoba.
Does my colleague believe that this is a responsible way to manage public finances?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, while going door to door to the 80,000 homes I went to, I spoke to a lot of people, and their priorities right now are affordability, housing and crime. I have served this community not from a podium but on the ground, helping children with their learning, supporting families through housing and financial challenges, listening to those who felt ignored and standing by our veterans, who deserve far more.
I have heard their stories and I have heard their struggles and hopes, and I am here because of them, to be their voice and to serve with the same commitment I have shown in my community. In the House, I will do what I was sent here to do: stand up for the people I represent and work every day to make their lives better.
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola.
We are in a new Parliament, yet we are seeing the exact same thing from the Liberals. In fact, the member for Winnipeg North is doing so much of the talking when we have many new and, dare I say, talented Liberals. Here we go again. We have two men on the Liberal side, and all they do, seemingly, is talk for everybody else.
I am going to ask my colleague, reflecting back on what the member opposite asked, what she was hearing at the doors about this strong, elbows-up mentality that was an apparent panacea.
Mr. Speaker, while I hear the government continue to distract itself from its lack of a plan or budget, I am going to stay focused on what the people in my riding sent me here to do, because a government making promises without a plan or a budget is not delivering; it is just issuing press releases.
Canadians cannot afford more of the same from the not-new government. In my riding, I heard about affordability, I heard about housing and I heard about crime. I heard directly from people in my community who are deeply concerned about the rise in crime, families who are afraid in their own neighbourhoods and seniors who no longer feel that—
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and a privilege to rise in the House of Commons once again, after a hard-fought election. I would like to sincerely thank the constituents of Niagara West for putting their trust in me to represent them and to be their voice in Ottawa for the eighth consecutive time. Niagara West is home to hard-working, good folks, and I am humbled to serve them.
I also want to mention our excellent campaign team, which got the job done. We had dozens of extraordinary volunteers who helped me get across the finish line. I thank everyone who put the work in. I will always remember and appreciate it.
I would also like to thank my family and my friends, and especially my wife, Rebecca. Whether it is during campaign time or while we are here in Ottawa, it requires a special type of person to be the spouse or the significant other of a political candidate or member of Parliament. I thank Rebecca for standing by my side for more than 10 years as we continue this journey together. This journey is about my passion to serve the constituents of Niagara West. My dedication to them has never wavered, and my pledge to them is to continue working tirelessly on their behalf.
With the election now behind us, our Conservative Party begins this Parliament with a stronger and bigger nationwide Conservative team. We added 2.4 million votes compared to the last election, with a total of over eight million votes, which is the biggest vote count and the biggest increase in votes in our party's history, the biggest vote share since 1998 and the best result in Newfoundland in two decades. Twenty-five additional Conservative members of Parliament have joined us in this place. I will add that it was 1.2 million more votes than Doug Ford got in February in Ontario for Conservatives in Ontario.
We expanded our support and coalition to include union workers, young people, newcomers and many others who had never voted before. Our message was one of hope and change, and it still is. I am proud of what we have achieved, although, yes, we did come up a little bit short.
As we begin another Parliament, it is no secret that we are facing many challenges in this country. We have unjustified U.S. tariffs hurting our people and the economy. We have a housing crisis. We have challenges of innovation, investment and productivity, and high youth unemployment. We have an out-of-control immigration system. We have discontent in our western provinces, with some western folks even thinking that separating from Canada would leave them better off. Clearly there is a lot of work for us to do in this place.
Earlier this spring, the Prime Minister was elected with a minority government, so he will need the support of other members of the House to successfully pass his agenda. As our Conservative leader said, we will work together with the government on initiatives that will make life better for all Canadians; we will also hold the government to account when it does the opposite.
Unfortunately, just a few weeks into the government's mandate, we are already seeing the challenges in how the Prime Minister and his ministers are approaching several files. I would like to address some of these in my reply to the Speech from the Throne. The Speech from the Throne, as we know, was delivered by His Majesty King Charles III on behalf of the government. It is the government's plan on how to deal with the problems Canadians face, one of which is trade.
We are all aware of the U.S. tariffs on Canada and how these tariffs are hurting Canadians and Canadian businesses. Conservatives believe that Canada needs to be self-reliant and much less dependent on the United States. One solution is free trade within Canada. For folks watching at home who are not yet aware, there are still dozens of regulations and red tape that makes it difficult for provinces to trade with one another.
Our Conservative team believes that Canada needs true free trade so workers can earn more, prices fall and businesses boom. We believe that Canada must fire up free enterprise to build pipelines, power lines, ports, rails, roads and tech so we are strong, self-reliant and sovereign. However, is that the government's approach? It does not seem like it.
There are deadlines the Liberals have given themselves, but not much in the way of details. Deadlines cannot be met without a plan. Do they actually have a plan? They do not exactly. The Prime Minister has even refused to put forward a budget this spring. Sure, there is a new spending bill in the docket, but details are scarce. It is not a plan; it is a half-trillion-dollar spending bill but not a budget.
Unfortunately, it is beginning to look as though the new Liberal government is just like the old one. In many ways, its spending bill is even worse than what we saw from the previous prime minister. It has massive increases in consultants, bureaucracies and the overall cost of government. What is discouraging is that the Prime Minister has already broken his promise. He promised to keep spending growth to 2% a year. What is the actual number? It is 8%, which is four times what he promised. Overall, federal government spending will grow almost three times faster than inflation and population combined. Maybe that is the reason the Prime Minister will not put forward a budget this spring.
A budget would usually have clear details as to where the money is going, but again, at this time, there is no budget, and there is no plan. Without a real plan, how can a government continue to function? How can it address, for example, the daunting task of fixing the housing crisis? It is a crisis, and it has been an evolving crisis now for more than five years.
Real estate organizations are saying that home sales are at crisis levels. They are saying the housing market is sagging. Inventory levels are ballooning, but lower interest rates have not spurred on sales. Folks are not buying homes, because they are worried about the economy. They are worried about job security. Young folks are concerned about jobs in general. There are not enough of them. Young folks are experiencing some of the highest unemployment rates in many, many years.
I heard directly from my constituents about these issues thousands of times at the doors just a few weeks ago. Young people voted for Conservatives in unprecedented numbers for a reason. For them, we were a source of hope for jobs and for housing. I cannot tell members how many young people told us that they had given up on home ownership. They said that they are not able to start families, because there is hardly anywhere affordable to live. There is just not enough building taking place.
As the housing crisis evolves, we now have a difficult job market, and the uncertainty is preventing young people, once again, from purchasing homes. I would confidently say that in many ways, this generation of young people has struggled tremendously compared with others before it. This is due to the Liberal policies of the last 10 years.
Let us talk about the GTA. The dream of home ownership is out of reach for far too many people in the GTA. The Building Industry and Land Development Association found that Toronto's preconstruction home sales have collapsed, and there is word of a dire housing shortage within two years. Last month, sales of preconstruction homes were 89% below the 10-year average and had decreased 72% from April 2024. This marks the seventh consecutive month of record-low sales of new homes across the GTA.
That is why I use the word “evolving” as it relates to the crisis. On the one hand, there is not enough building taking place to house Canadians who need it. On the other hand, young folks are worried about their finances, and in many cases, they are waiting to start families because they do not have the right accommodations. The third part is this: How can they go and buy a new home when the prices are so ridiculously high?
It seems as though the Canadian promise that was available to generations prior has been broken. The government has simply failed young people, and things are expected to get worse. One article says, “The new housing industry is decelerating quickly and a massive supply deficit into the 2027 to 2029 period is taking shape.” Overall, things are not looking great on the housing front, and once again, without a budget and without a plan, the government is not taking its responsibilities to Canadians seriously.
Let us also talk about folks who are lucky enough to already own a home. How are they doing financially? They are not doing well. In fact, mortgage delinquencies have gone up by 6.5%, and 90-plus-day delinquencies increased by 72% in Ontario since the first quarter of 2024. What about the folks who have other types of credit? In the first quarter of 2025, 1.4 million Canadians were unable to make a credit payment. Delinquencies rose nearly 9% year over year, with non-mortgage delinquencies being the most severe in Ontario, where they are up 24%.
Rising costs and squeezed paycheques have hit youth especially hard; Canadians 25 and under experienced a 15% increase in missed payments. Among those under 26 years old, 90-plus-day delinquency rates for just credit cards saw a 22% spike year over year. I am worried about young Canadians, given these figures. Equifax says that the wages entering the job market are not matching the amount young folks may need so they can pay off their debt.
Urgent action is clearly required now. Workable, timely solutions are critical. I am a bit concerned about some of the slogans in the Prime Minister's announcement and the throne speech, although he says he is not a fan of them. What Canadians desperately need is for all of us to come together with a plan, but a plan that clearly outlines the actions and that comes in the form of a budget.
This government must release a spring budget so that we can have a path forward. Otherwise, I fear that all these crises Canadians are currently going through will not be adequately addressed. I am worried for young Canadians; I am worried for homeowners, and I am worried for families.
As I mentioned earlier, we need to work toward helping Canadians and Canadian businesses in these difficult times. I am ready to do so. I hope the government will take things seriously, given the issues we face. Our Conservative team stands with Canadians, and we are ready to offer our help to make life better for families across our beautiful country, so Canada is affordable, safe, self-reliant and united.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about the cost of living. I have great news.
Last month, eligibility for the Canadian dental care plan was expanded to all age groups. That means more than eight million Canadians now have access to the affordable dental care they need.
Here is my question: Is my colleague from Niagara West as excited as I am about this great news about expanding access to the Canadian dental care plan?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I was out with colleagues last night. There was a dentist among us who was talking about the program and how difficult it is for some dentists to be able to sign up because of the rates the government offers them. Once again, we have this great national program, but we expect people on the ground to take the haircut and take the hit. That does not seem reasonable.
Of course, these programs are beneficial. They are great, but they have to be managed properly, and one thing I can say about the federal government is that it does not know how to manage anything. If the last 10 years has shown us anything, it is that it has a hard inability to lead or manage anything.
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, especially when I receive such cheers from my Liberal colleagues.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Frank Caputo: Mr. Speaker, I thank them for their cheers.
It is also especially an honour to rise when the member for Kingston and the Islands was going to grace us with yet another intervention, but members have to hear from me instead.
I listened intently to my colleague's speech. He spoke about what he was hearing at the doors. We heard about elbows up and how the Liberals have a plan, yet they came with no plan and no budget. What would his constituents, in his view, think if he ran his offices or Parliament without a plan and just simply relied on, dare I say, slogans?
Mr. Speaker, that has been one of the challenges we have seen over the last number of years. I can assure all the new people who are joining us in the House that it has been years during which the Liberal Party has talked about its plans, its communications and all these grandiose things it is going to do, yet it never delivers.
I have to laugh when I hear new members come into the House to say they have to fix this problem. They are right. It is the problem you guys created, so thanks for showing up to give us a hand. We appreciate that—
Mr. Speaker, that is correct.
What I would say to my hon colleague is this: The Liberals need to make sure that they not only have a plan but also implement that plan. That is something we have not seen on this side of the House over the last 10 years.
[Translation]
It being 6:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the amendment to the amendment and of the amendment, as amended, now before the House.
The question is on the amendment to the amendment.
[English]
If a member participating in person wishes that the amendment to the amendment be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
[Translation]
(The House divided on the amendment to the amendment, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 2)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAcan
Aitchison
Al Soud
Albas
Ali
Allison
Alty
Anand
Anandasangaree
Anderson
Anstey
Arnold
Au
Auguste
Baber
Bailey
Bains
Baker
Baldinelli
Bardeesy
Barlow
Barrett
Barsalou-Duval
Battiste
Beaulieu
Beech
Belanger (Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River)
Bélanger (Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt)
Bendayan
Berthold
Bexte
Bezan
Bittle
Blair
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Block
Blois
Bonin
Bonk
Borrelli
Boulerice
Bragdon
Brassard
Brière
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Caputo
Carney
Carr
Casey
Chagger
Champagne
Champoux
Chang
Chartrand
Chatel
Chen
Chenette
Chi
Church
Clark
Cobena
Cody
Connors
Cooper
Cormier
Coteau
Dabrusin
Dalton
Dancho
Dandurand
Danko
Davidson
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Davies (Niagara South)
Dawson
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
d'Entremont
DeRidder
Deschênes
Deschênes-Thériault
Desrochers
Dhaliwal
Dhillon
Diab
Diotte
Doherty
Dowdall
Duclos
Duguid
Duncan
Dzerowicz
Earle
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Epp
Erskine-Smith
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake)
Falk (Provencher)
Fancy-Landry
Fanjoy
Fergus
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fortin
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Fuhr
Gaheer
Gainey
Gallant
Garon
Gasparro
Gaudreau
Gazan
Généreux
Genuis
Gerretsen
Gill (Calgary Skyview)
Gill (Brampton West)
Gill (Calgary McKnight)
Gill (Windsor West)
Gill (Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan)
Gill (Abbotsford—South Langley)
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Grant
Greaves
Groleau
Guay
Guglielmin
Guilbeault
Gull-Masty
Gunn
Hajdu
Hallan
Hanley
Hardy
Harrison Hill
Hepfner
Hirtle
Ho
Hoback
Hodgson
Hogan
Holman
Housefather
Hussen
Iacono
Idlout
Jackson
Jaczek
Jansen
Jeneroux
Jivani
Johns
Joly
Joseph
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Kelly
Khalid
Khanna
Kibble
Kirkland
Klassen
Kmiec
Konanz
Koutrakis
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kronis
Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot)
Kuruc (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek)
Kusie
Kwan
Lake
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lantsman
Lapointe (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles)
Lapointe (Sudbury)
Larouche
Lattanzio
Lauzon
Lavack
Lavoie
Lawrence
Lawton
LeBlanc
Lefebvre
Leitao
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Lightbound
Lloyd
Lobb
Long
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
Ma
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacDonald (Cardigan)
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Mahal
Majumdar
Malette (Bay of Quinte)
Malette (Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk)
Maloney
Mantle
Martel
May
Mazier
McCauley
McKelvie
McKenzie
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McKnight
McLean (Calgary Centre)
McLean (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke)
McPherson
Melillo
Ménard
Mendès
Menegakis
Michel
Miedema
Miller
Mingarelli
Moore
Morin
Morrison
Morrissey
Motz
Muys
Myles
Naqvi
Nater
Nathan
Nguyen
Noormohamed
Normandin
Ntumba
Oliphant
Olszewski
O'Rourke
Osborne
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Perron
Petitpas Taylor
Powlowski
Provost
Ramsay
Rana
Reid
Rempel Garner
Reynolds
Richards
Roberts
Robertson
Rochefort
Romanado
Rood
Rowe
Royer
Sahota
Saini
Sarai
Sari
Savard-Tremblay
Sawatzky
Scheer
Schiefke
Schmale
Seeback
Sgro
Sheehan
Shipley
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Simard
Small
Sodhi
Solomon
Sousa
Steinley
Ste-Marie
Stevenson
St-Pierre
Strahl
Strauss
Stubbs
Sudds
Tesser Derksen
Thériault
Thomas
Thompson
Tochor
Tolmie
Turnbull
Uppal
Valdez
van Koeverden
Van Popta
Vandenbeld
Vien
Viersen
Villeneuve
Vis
Wagantall
Warkentin
Watchorn
Waugh
Weiler
Williamson
Yip
Zahid
Zerucelli
Zimmer
Zuberi
Total: -- 331
NAYS
NilPAIRED
Members
ChambersChong
Eyolfson
McGuinty
Plamondon
Ruff
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Wilkinson
Total: -- 8
I declare the subamendment carried.
The next question is on the amendment as amended.
If a member participating in person wishes that the amendment as amended be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
An hon. member: Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded vote.
(The House divided on the amendment, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 3)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Anderson
Anstey
Arnold
Au
Baber
Bailey
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Barsalou-Duval
Beaulieu
Bélanger (Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt)
Berthold
Bexte
Bezan
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Block
Bonin
Bonk
Borrelli
Boulerice
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Caputo
Champoux
Cobena
Cody
Cooper
Dalton
Dancho
Davidson
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Davies (Niagara South)
Dawson
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
d'Entremont
DeRidder
Deschênes
Diotte
Doherty
Dowdall
Duncan
Epp
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake)
Falk (Provencher)
Fortin
Gallant
Garon
Gaudreau
Gazan
Généreux
Genuis
Gill (Calgary Skyview)
Gill (Brampton West)
Gill (Calgary McKnight)
Gill (Windsor West)
Gill (Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan)
Gill (Abbotsford—South Langley)
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Groleau
Guglielmin
Gunn
Hallan
Hardy
Ho
Hoback
Holman
Idlout
Jackson
Jansen
Jeneroux
Jivani
Johns
Kelly
Khanna
Kibble
Kirkland
Kmiec
Konanz
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kronis
Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot)
Kuruc (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek)
Kusie
Kwan
Lake
Lantsman
Larouche
Lawrence
Lawton
Lefebvre
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Lloyd
Ma
Mahal
Majumdar
Malette (Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk)
Mantle
Martel
May
Mazier
McCauley
McKenzie
McLean (Calgary Centre)
McPherson
Melillo
Menegakis
Moore
Morin
Morrison
Motz
Muys
Nater
Normandin
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Perron
Reid
Rempel Garner
Reynolds
Richards
Roberts
Rood
Rowe
Savard-Tremblay
Scheer
Schmale
Seeback
Shipley
Simard
Small
Steinley
Ste-Marie
Stevenson
Strahl
Stubbs
Thériault
Thomas
Tochor
Tolmie
Uppal
Van Popta
Vien
Viersen
Vis
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Williamson
Zimmer
Total: -- 166
NAYS
Members
AcanAl Soud
Ali
Alty
Anand
Anandasangaree
Auguste
Bains
Baker
Bardeesy
Battiste
Beech
Belanger (Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River)
Bendayan
Bittle
Blair
Blois
Brière
Carney
Carr
Casey
Chagger
Champagne
Chang
Chartrand
Chatel
Chen
Chenette
Chi
Church
Clark
Connors
Cormier
Coteau
Dabrusin
Dandurand
Danko
Deschênes-Thériault
Desrochers
Dhaliwal
Dhillon
Diab
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Earle
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Fancy-Landry
Fanjoy
Fergus
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Fuhr
Gaheer
Gainey
Gasparro
Gerretsen
Gould
Grant
Greaves
Guay
Guilbeault
Gull-Masty
Hajdu
Hanley
Harrison Hill
Hepfner
Hirtle
Hodgson
Hogan
Housefather
Hussen
Iacono
Jaczek
Joly
Joseph
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Klassen
Koutrakis
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles)
Lapointe (Sudbury)
Lattanzio
Lauzon
Lavack
Lavoie
LeBlanc
Leitao
Lightbound
Long
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacDonald (Cardigan)
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Malette (Bay of Quinte)
Maloney
McKelvie
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McKnight
McLean (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke)
Ménard
Mendès
Michel
Miedema
Miller
Mingarelli
Morrissey
Myles
Naqvi
Nathan
Nguyen
Noormohamed
Ntumba
Oliphant
Olszewski
O'Rourke
Osborne
Petitpas Taylor
Powlowski
Provost
Ramsay
Rana
Robertson
Rochefort
Romanado
Royer
Sahota
Saini
Sarai
Sari
Sawatzky
Schiefke
Sgro
Sheehan
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Sodhi
Solomon
Sousa
St-Pierre
Sudds
Tesser Derksen
Thompson
Turnbull
Valdez
van Koeverden
Vandenbeld
Villeneuve
Watchorn
Weiler
Yip
Zahid
Zerucelli
Zuberi
Total: -- 164
PAIRED
Members
ChambersChong
Eyolfson
McGuinty
Plamondon
Ruff
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Wilkinson
Total: -- 8
Adjournment Proceedings
[Adjournment Proceedings]
[English]
Mr. Speaker, it was Radio-Canada that first reported that the Prime Minister had co-founded an investment fund worth over $25 billion, combined from two funds. These investment funds were not headquartered here in Canada; they were headquartered above a bicycle shop in Bermuda. Why would investments be headquartered in Bermuda? Why would they be headquartered above a bike shop? It is because they are avoiding paying Canadian taxes.
We have raised questions that the Prime Minister can answer, that the Prime Minister should answer and that the Prime Minister must answer. After 10 years with the last government and Justin Trudeau breaking our ethics laws multiple times and presiding over a cabinet that saw repeated breaches of our ethics laws, Canadians are looking for leadership, for honesty and for transparency. The Prime Minister has an opportunity to provide that transparency to Canadians.
In response to my question in question period, we heard the government House leader say that Canada has stringent ethics rules and the Liberals take them very seriously. Canadians have no idea what the Prime Minister put into those blind trusts, but the Prime Minister knows what he put into those blind trusts. We do not know how much deferred compensation the Prime Minister will realize based on the performance of those funds that he set up, but he knows. That deferred compensation is not something that can be placed in a blind trust. It will be paid out based on the performance of those funds, and the Prime Minister has a real way to impact their performance based on decisions that he makes at the cabinet table.
What we want to know is this: What did the Prime Minister put into his blind trust, and is the Prime Minister going to be receiving deferred compensation payments? Finally, we need to know if the Prime Minister has ever been invested in funds that avoided paying taxes here in Canada. I would like to know if we can just get a clear answer. The government House leader has four minutes to tell us how seriously the government is going to take these ethics laws and that there is going to be a change in tone and tenor from the right hon. Prime Minister. Will he do that?
Was the Prime Minister invested in funds that were avoiding paying taxes? Will the government House leader admit that the Prime Minister had set up funds that were headquartered above a bike shop in Bermuda? Will the Prime Minister be the beneficiary of deferred compensation payments from those funds at Brookfield? Will the Prime Minister finally just take his obligations seriously and tell Canadians the totality of what that blind trust looked like at the time it was set up?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the House that compliance with the ethics rules is not optional in Canada. It is an obligation that all elected members of the House must comply with, regardless of their position. These rules are designed to guarantee the integrity of our institutions and to maintain the trust that Canadians place in us.
The Prime Minister must obey the same rules as every other member of Parliament. However, it is important to note that the Prime Minister did more than just meet those requirements; he exceeded them. He proactively provided the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner with all the information required, and he did so pre-emptively. That is leadership. It is not simply a matter of following the rules when necessary. It is a matter of anticipating them, doing more than the bare minimum and setting an example for all elected officials. Canadians expect their Prime Minister to act with integrity, and that is exactly what he did.
Unfortunately, some members of the opposition are trying to sow doubt by raising unfounded concerns or even conspiracy theories. I firmly believe that this type of rhetoric does nothing to increase public confidence in the government or in the elected members of the opposition. On the contrary, they are undermining the credibility of all our institutions, for the sole purpose of trying to score cheap political points.
I would remind the House that Canada has one of the most stringent ethics regimes in the world. Our system demands transparency, full disclosure and accountability of all public office holders. Not only did the Prime Minister fully comply with the rules, he went further by clearly demonstrating that he has nothing to hide. It also needs to be said that each new member is bound by the same code as all other members. I sincerely hope that all members of the House comply with their obligations just as diligently. On this side of the House, we have always followed the rules, not out of obligation but out of principle.
To us, ethics is not a campaign slogan; it is an ongoing responsibility. Canadians can count on us to continue to be unequivocally transparent and diligent.
On this side of the House, we take these responsibilities seriously, and Canadians can count on that.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, let me quote the government House leader. He said that on that side of the House, they have always followed the rules. He sat in cabinet with former prime minister Justin Trudeau, who broke those laws twice, as did other members of cabinet. We cannot take him at his word.
He also says that the reporting on Radio-Canada was a conspiracy theory. Well, it is a fact. The Prime Minister, the leader of the Liberal Party, set up these funds that were headquartered in Bermuda to avoid paying Canadian taxes, headquartered above a bicycle shop. We need to know if the Prime Minister is going to be the beneficiary of deferred compensation from those funds, when he stands to improve their performance based on decisions he can take around the cabinet table.
Canadians have no information because the Prime Minister is stonewalling, refusing to be transparent with Canadians. Will he come clean with Canadians today? Will the government House leader commit to transparency for a change and tell Canadians what they need to know about these investments?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The Prime Minister fully complied with the Conflict of Interest Act and even went above and beyond what was required. From the outset, he proactively disclosed all relevant information to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, demonstrating his commitment to the transparency and accountability that this role demands.
Canada has some of the strictest ethics rules in the world, and Canadians can rest assured that those rules are being followed. For members on this side of the House, merely following the rules is not enough; we strive to go above and beyond.
Some people may choose to engage in speculation or political theatre, but we remain focused on maintaining the trust of Canadians. Ethics and integrity are not negotiable, and that is a standard we are proud to uphold.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and his cabinet took the time to prepare a spending plan, but they did not make the time to prepare a plan to pay for it.
Last week, I asked a simple question: “With the economic storm clouds moving in, how is it possible not to have a budget this spring?”
Since then, the Liberal government presented the main estimates to Parliament to request nearly half a trillion dollars, $486 billion, to fund the government until next March. However, it has not presented a budget, which is the very document that shows how it intends to pay for all of this spending. How irresponsible is that? Imagine someone walking into a bank for a mortgage with all of their expenses, their car payments, groceries and student debt, but refusing to provide evidence of their income. Any lender would tell them to come back when they have evidence of their income.
As a finance professional of 14 years, I say the same to this Liberal government: Come back when there is a plan to pay for all of this spending. The government says economic conditions may change over the summer. Yes, there is an uncertain world, there are summits, and there are shifting forecasts. That is exactly why we need a budget. When income is lost, we budget. When costs rise, we budget. When we want to change our circumstances, we budget. Our GDP is struggling, our productivity is down, our purchasing power is crumbling and the unemployment rate is rising. These are the fingerprints of 10 years of failed Liberal policies.
If the Prime Minister and his finance minister want to be taken seriously as stewards of the economy, they need to do what every family, every business and every government must do: put forward a budget.
It is my sincere hope that we can work together to provide relief to Canadian families and businesses and to steer Canada in the right direction. However, the government needs to provide the fundamental information for every parliamentarian to make an informed decision on what is best for Canadians. On matters of finance, my trust is built on numbers, on accountability and on a budget.
I ask again: With the economic storm clouds moving in, how is it possible not to produce a budget this spring?
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the member for Newmarket—Aurora. Being in the House is a privilege, and I encourage her to enjoy every day. I have been privileged to be here since 2015, through four elections, and I know the excitement of being here. I know it is a big machine here in Ottawa, but I congratulate her for her win.
This is the first time I have risen in the House this Parliament, and I want to thank the wonderful constituents of Saint John—Kennebecasis for returning me here for the fourth time. I certainly want to thank my campaign manager, Kevin Collins, and I want to thank the wonderful staff, the wonderful team, I have in Saint John, with Jeannette McLaughlin and Don Darling making sure things are very well taken care of on the home front.
Let me list some facts. Inflation is down from 8.1% in June 2022 to 1.7% now. The Conservatives, at every step up, said that it was our fault, yet now that inflation is down to below the Bank of Canada's target rate, I guess we do not get any credit for that. Canada right now has an unemployment rate of 6.9%. Labour force participation is at 65.3%, which is well above the U.S. number of 62.5%. We have a AAA credit rating and the lowest debt and deficit in the G7. The list goes on and on.
Sometimes I wonder why the Conservatives hold themselves as the major economic stewards of our economy. It was their government, prior to the Liberals, that ran nine straight deficits. They basically made a mess of our economy through regressive policies.
As Liberals, we believe in growing a strong economy. We believe in investing in Canadians. As Liberals, we believe that government has a role to play in people's lives, whether it is with the Canada child benefit the Conservatives voted against, the child care the Conservatives voted against, the dental care the Conservatives voted against or the wonderful housing programs and housing initiatives, such as the co-investment fund, the rapid housing initiative and the housing accelerator fund, which the Conservatives voted against. The Conservatives voted against each and every one of those initiatives, which have been proven to help Canada.
We will do the right things to build our economy, rebuild our economy and make our economy the greatest economy in the G7.
Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is that there is no plan to pay for the $486 billion in spending that the Liberals have asked Parliament to authorize. It is not a plan to have no plan. If there were a plan, they would have presented it.
Our GDP is struggling. Our productivity is down. Our purchasing power is crumbling. The unemployment rate is rising, and tariffs are hurting our industries. The purpose of a budget is to bring order to uncertainty, but the Liberal government has done the opposite. By refusing to present a budget this spring, it has deepened the volatility in an already fragile economy. Fiscal credibility is earned by showing the numbers respecting the process that has defined Canada for more than half a century.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have voiced very clearly who they think should be running and leading our economy.
Listening to the member opposite, we would not think we just had an election on April 28 and a throne speech last week. The budget will come in due time. Our Prime Minister is regarded, I would argue, as one of the top economic minds in Canada.
We do have a plan. His Majesty said, during the Speech from the Throne, “In all of its actions, the Government will be guided by a new fiscal discipline: spend less so Canadians can invest more.” He also said we “will balance its operating budget over the next three years by cutting waste, capping the public service, ending duplication, and deploying technology to improve public sector productivity.”
We will deliver the details of our plan in the fall via a detailed, comprehensive, effective, ambitious and prudent federal budget.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I asked the Prime Minister and the government a very simple question about Canada's energy sector. I even did the homework for the government. I pointed out how the industrial carbon tax is making Canada less competitive and less affordable. I pointed out how the oil and gas production cap is keeping our resources in the ground and scaring away investors. I pointed out how Bill C-69 is making it essentially impossible to build pipelines in the country.
I asked the industry minister whether the government would commit to Canada's energy sector, as the Prime Minister occasionally says depending on what room he is in, and repeal these anti-energy laws. She responded without mentioning the words “oil”, “gas” or “resources”. The writer who wrote her response to my question must have been the same writer who wrote the government's throne speech because it did not address oil and gas in the least.
This is not just a western Canada issue. When we do not support Canada's energy sector, we are actually harming the country as a whole. We are making ourselves more dependent on the United States. We are making ourselves less competitive. We are compromising our sovereignty and independence and even our security. It is curious that the government is scared of the word “pipeline” and will not utter it in many of the responses we hear in this chamber and in much of the other communication we get from the government.
My question for the government is incredibly simple. It comes down to the path it wants to chart forward. Does it support a future that invests in Canadian energy or does it support the environmental radicals who want to keep our resources in the ground?
The reason I bring this up is that the facts are abundantly clear. Between 2015 and 2025, the Liberal government killed 16 major energy projects. This resulted in a $176-billion hit to the economy.
When I talk about the competitive advantage of investing in resources, we need not look further than our neighbour to the south, the United States. In the last 10 years or so, between 2010 and 2021, the United States grew its natural gas exports by 485%. What happened in Canada in that same time period? That is a good question. They actually went down by 18%. This is Canada, which has access to an incredible wealth of resources. The only thing standing in the way of embracing them is the “keep it in the ground”, anti-energy, innovation-killing attitude the Liberal government has embodied.
This is where we are right now. The Liberals like to talk about the fact that, in their words, they are not anti-pipeline; they just want there to be a consensus. How can there be a consensus when they do not even have a consensus in their front bench, as evidenced by a speaker in cabinet who just a couple of weeks ago said that he did not know and that we did not need any pipelines? That was the former environment minister, who is now the Minister of Canadian Identity.
We have laid out the facts clearly, so I will ask the government this: Once and for all, will it repeal its anti-energy policies and commit to pipeline development in Canada?
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with many things the member opposite said and how he characterized them. I appreciate that he asked the question on a day that I think is a particularly important day because the Prime Minister and premiers from provinces and territories across our country sat down to have conversations about how we can better work together to unify our country, stand together in the face of what we are facing from the United States and how we can build the nation-building projects that will make our country stronger.
On a day when we have seen unity across our country, I really want to highlight that, because that is where we need to go. That is where Canadians wanted us to go. Canadians from coast to coast to coast elected this government because they wanted to us to come together, protect our country, stand up for our country and build great things together. Today is a particularly good day to highlight how that is moving forward already, very early on in the new government.
Our Liberal government is focused on results, and that means protecting and creating good jobs, attracting investment and building a low-risk, low-cost and low-carbon clean economy for the future. Right now, as I mentioned, the Prime Minister is working with premiers to identify projects of national significance that will grow our economy, and Canadians rightly expect to see, as we look at those projects, that we are also upholding strong environmental standards. That is where the difference between our government and the Conservatives can be quite stark.
I will point out that Canadians rejected Pierre Poilievre's vision because it was to give polluters a free pass. There was talk about industrial carbon pricing. Pierre Poilievre's vision that was rejected by Canadians was to ignore the cost of climate change to our economy, to workers and to communities. What Canadians chose instead was to work on how to build a unified, strong country that can get things built. That is exactly what we are working on.
When it comes to approving major projects, we are focused on getting them built faster without cutting corners. That means respecting indigenous rights, collaborating with provinces and territories and ensuring that projects are in the national interest to build a strong future. The Conservative alternative, from what I have heard, is no environmental safeguards, no provincial involvement or input and no indigenous input or involvement in this process, and that does not create certainty for investors. Canadians have rejected that failed approach. In fact, with that approach under the previous Conservative government, things were not getting built.
This government will get major projects built, and we are going to make sure we do it right. We are going to be focused on protecting Canadian workers, growing our economy to be the strongest in the G7 and getting projects of national significance built.
Mr. Speaker, I am floored. The minister just had four uninterrupted minutes to answer a very simple question about where the government stands on development of the oil and gas sector in Canada and the construction of pipelines. In those four minutes, not once did the minister even say the word “pipeline”. She did not utter the word. It proves the point I made in my initial question, which is that the government does not view pipelines as having any part in its plan for the economy moving forward.
I have a very simple question: When the minister talks about projects she would like to see Canada move forward on, do they include pipelines, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, when the government looks at projects of national significance, we are not going to take the advice of the member opposite. We are going to look at how to build together with premiers from the provinces and territories and with indigenous peoples right across our country. We are going to look at the projects of national significance and we are going to get them built.
The meeting today with the Prime Minister and the premiers is an amazing first step on that. That is leadership that Canadians want to see, and that is the leadership that we are going to continue to build on so we can make sure we get projects built.
Publication Explorer
Publication Explorer