Bill C-48 (Historical)

Oil Tanker Moratorium Act

An Act respecting the regulation of vessels that transport crude oil or persistent oil to or from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia's north coast

This enactment enacts the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, which prohibits oil tankers that are carrying more than 12 500 metric tons of crude oil or persistent oil as cargo from stopping, or unloading crude oil or persistent oil, at ports or marine installations located along British Columbia’s north coast from the northern tip of Vancouver Island to the Alaska border. The Act prohibits loading if it would result in the oil tanker carrying more than 12 500 metric tons of those oils as cargo.
The Act also prohibits vessels and persons from transporting crude oil or persistent oil between oil tankers and those ports or marine installations for the purpose of aiding the oil tanker to circumvent the prohibitions on oil tankers.
Finally, the Act establishes an administration and enforcement regime that includes requirements to provide information and to follow directions and that provides for penalties of up to a maximum of five million dollars.

Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in fact the best thing we can do for the oil sector is get the Liberal government out of the way. If we want to create good jobs and a better economy and to get our books back on track, the way to do it is to remove Liberal Bill C-69, which does not let any new pipelines get built; get Liberal Bill C-48 out of the way so we can get our product to the Asian markets; and remove the Liberal industrial carbon tax so we can signal to the world we are open for business and give our youth a future in this country once again.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I want to inform you that I am splitting my time with my good friend from Saskatoon West, who brought me to his riding. I remember it was -40°C. He promised me he would show me an ice rink. I did not know he was talking about the roads in Saskatoon, not an actual ice rink.

The Liberals should call this motion we currently have in front of us “the guillotine”, because they are taking the guillotine to transparency and accountability. They are trying to end all debate at the finance committee because the numbers are catching up to them. After 10 years of reckless spending, deficits and higher taxes for Canadians, all of those numbers are adding up. In fact, the Prime Minister, who said he would be more responsible, has doubled Justin Trudeau's deficit. It is rising to $72 billion. The Liberals are adding another $68 billion in new spending.

The PBO came out with a scathing report just two weeks ago, saying the Liberal government has a “less than 1 per cent” chance of meeting one of its own fiscal anchors, and debunking the other fiscal anchors the government had put in place. What are all of these numbers going to do?

The PBO might say there is a less than 1% chance of the Liberals meeting their fiscal anchor. I would argue there is also a less than 1% chance of a Liberal answering a question in this place and a less than 1% chance that we will get answers at the finance committee on this very expensive spring economic statement. Of course, whenever the numbers are bad, the Liberal government does what it always does, which is shut down debate and shut down accountability. The opposition's job, which Canadians sent us to this place to do, is to expose the endless, reckless spending by the Prime Minister and the Liberal government.

It is not just us saying things are bad right now. In fact, the Bank of Canada said “the economy is soft”, the PBO said growth will “remain subdued”, TD said the economy is operating “well below capacity” and BMO said there is “no sense sugar-coating this sour result”. Everyone feels it. The fact is that the Prime Minister, who said we would have the fastest‑growing economy in the G7, ended up delivering the fastest‑shrinking economy in the entire G20.

This plays out in the real world for Canadians. This reckless spending and the money that goes to Liberal insiders all adds up. In fact, Canadians are poorer now than they have ever been. We see two million Canadians going to a food bank every single month. We have one in five Canadians who are food insecure. A third of the people who are going to food banks now are children.

Members would think I am talking about some third‑world statistic, but this is what Liberal Canada looks like today because of the reckless spending, taxes and overburdening our industries. All of these have driven out so much of our investment that Canadians now have to suffer the results. We have fewer options and less competition. Costs are going up because of Liberal taxes. At the end of the day, that is why our food inflation is one of the fastest‑growing in the entire G7. We have the highest household debt, the highest housing costs in the G7 and the second‑highest unemployment in the entire G7. This is not to mention that ours is the only country in the entire G20 to be in a recession.

The Conservatives are wholeheartedly against shutting down this motion. I sit on the finance committee. The Liberals cannot stand that we are asking the questions that Canadians are telling us to ask about this incompetent bill they put forward, which would not do anything but make the lives of Canadians more expensive, whether it be through taxes or the inflation the Liberal government is so well known for creating for Canadians.

In fact, we put forward amendment after amendment to make this bill better. That is our role as His Majesty's loyal opposition. For example, the pause on the excise tax the government is bringing forward is a third of the tax for a third of the year. I put an amendment forward to extend it to the rest of the year. The Liberals are ideologically obsessed with the carbon tax. There's the clean fuel standard. We do not want to include the GST on top of that, which would have saved Canadians 25¢ per litre, or $1,200 for a family. I tried putting a common-sense amendment forward at committee that would have extended the pause on the excise tax until the end of the year. That would have made more savings for Canadians.

Once again, the Liberals filibustered that until they decided to vote it down, as they always do. It was a very common-sense solution. This was just one of many amendments and subamendments we were putting forward. There were officials there, but unfortunately the Liberals are so unorganized on this committee that they did not have the right officials there, and sometimes they were not answering the questions properly.

We are putting forward the questions that Canadians deserve answers to, but once again the Liberals, with this motion specifically, are trying to end debate, transparency and any type of accountability for which we are trying to get answers. This is just another tactic for them to delay, which is what we are always against as Conservatives.

Speaking of the inevitable, we are the only G20 country in a recession. The statistics are not looking good for Canada. No matter who is forecasting them, things are not going well right now. In fact, if we look at business investment, we see that in the last five consecutive quarters, business investment has gone down. That is the track record of the government. In fact, it has driven out $1 trillion of good Canadian investment, to the Americans. Those are our jobs and factories or growth that could have happened here, but high Liberal taxes and regulation have driven them away.

The Liberal Prime Minister has driven out, as a net loss, $20 billion of investment outside Canada. He is the guy who said he would fix everything. He is the guy who would deal with President Donald Trump. He still cannot get a deal, and he is driving more investment away and spending more of Canadians' money. He is jet-setting around the world on the taxpayer dime. While he is pushing more Canadians into food bank lines, at the same time, he is making them pay for his extravagant meals on flights. In fact, over the last year, he spent $1 million on inflight catering. On three flights, he spent more on salmon than what a family will spend on groceries for the entire year. In fact, after rising grocery prices, now Canadian families will pay $1,000 more for groceries just this year.

That is the track record of the government. Instead of helping Canadians, it will push them into food bank lines, make them food-insecure and, at the same time, make them pay for lofty meals on the Prime Minister's flights that end up with fake handshakes wherever the Liberals go, fake MOUs and contracts they sign. They cheer themselves on with announcements that never end up materializing to the benefit of Canadians. That is why our economy is as bad and as weak as it is right now.

There was a scathing report by the PBO, but there was also a scathing report by United Way. These are stats that, again, make it seem as though we are in a third world country. Of the Canadians who responded, 38% reported experiencing at least one form of food insecurity in the past six months, and 27% were worried their food would run out before they had money to buy more.

There is a solution to all this. Conservatives are just asking for the Liberal government to get out of the way. Let us bring affordability and safety back to Canada, which the Liberals have driven out since they took over. We can get rid of the industrial carbon tax to bring down the cost of food and fuel for Canadians. Let us put more money back into their pockets. Let us extend the pause on the excise tax to the end of the year and also include the GST and the clean fuel standard. Let us save families $1,200 this year. Let us bring back investment by removing barriers such as the “no new pipelines” bill, Bill C-69, and Bill C-48, the tanker ban.

By doing that, we could signal to the world that we are open for business once again. Let us have more pipelines, mines and dams. Let us get everything going. Let us have more infrastructure built so we can have more jobs and get our economy back on track. We can do these things only once the Liberals get out of the way.

Ukrainian Heritage Month Act

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity this afternoon to speak in favour of Bill S‑210, which would designate the month of September as Ukrainian heritage month. This bill is particularly relevant to Saskatchewan and the Prairies as a whole because of the long and rich history of Ukrainians and Ukrainian communities that has contributed to the development of that region of the country.

The settlement of western Canada was one of the most transformational events in Canadian history. In the late 1800s, the land that would eventually become Saskatchewan had a population of approximately 10,000 people. That number would increase nearly a hundredfold by the 1920s. Homesteaders from all across Europe, including some of my great-grandparents, moved to Saskatchewan because of the promise of free farmland and a better life. Many of these settlers came from Ukraine. In addition to their farming practices, they brought with them their language, their culture and their traditions, many of which can still be seen today across the Prairies.

The town of Hafford, Saskatchewan, proudly displays Ukrainian-language street signs as a tribute to the Ukrainians who first homesteaded and settled in that area. What would become the Ukrainian Museum of Canada was established in Saskatoon in 1941 by the Ukrainian Women's Association of Canada before it expanded into a national network of museums. The town of Vegreville, Alberta, is home to the world's largest pysanka, or Ukrainian Easter egg, outside of Ukraine. This Ukrainian Easter egg is one of the most popular tourist stops along the Yellowhead Highway, visited by thousands of tourists every year, including my fiancé and me just last summer.

Of course, many Ukrainian Canadians, as well as Canadians without Ukrainian heritage, celebrate Vyshyvanka Day every year on the third Thursday in May. The vyshyvanka is the traditional Ukrainian embroidered shirt. I know I enjoyed wearing my vyshyvanka and spending time with members of the Regina chapter of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress when we celebrated this occasion in Regina just last month.

With the possible exception of the grain elevators, I would argue that few buildings have defined the prairie landscape more than Ukrainian churches, both Catholic and Orthodox. There are two of these churches in particular that I would like to mention. The first is St. Michael's Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Regina, which will be celebrating its 100th anniversary next year. I know that I and many members of the community are looking forward to the centennial celebrations.

The second is St. Onuphrius Ukrainian Catholic Church. This church was originally built in Smoky Lake County, northeast of Edmonton, between 1915 and 1928. In the 1990s, the building was meticulously disassembled and relocated to the Canadian Museum of History in Gatineau, where it was reassembled in the Canadian history hall, where it stands today for all to see.

While the history of Ukrainians in Canada has been mostly positive for over a century, we recently entered some very sad and dark times in February 2022, with Russia's illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. We all remember the images on TV of Russian tanks rolling across the border into Ukraine. I remember having many conversations with members of Regina's Ukrainian community. I would ask them, “Do you have any friends or family members who are close to the fighting?” The answer was invariably yes. Practically everyone had received an email or text message, or had had a phone call, from a friend or family member not far from the fighting, and practically all of them had fled with nothing more than the shirts on their backs. It is certainly a tragedy that they will remember for the rest of their lives, but as Mr. Rogers famously said, whenever there is a catastrophe, always “look for the helpers”, because if we look for the helpers, we will know that there is hope. When the people of Ukraine needed help, the people of Saskatchewan provided that hope.

All of a sudden, a century of Ukrainian heritage in Saskatchewan kicked into action. Cousins, aunts and uncles started texting each other to arrange for spare bedrooms and clothing and to make all of the necessary arrangements to welcome their Ukrainian friends and family members who were coming to Saskatchewan to flee the war zone. People who had taken Ukrainian language classes in Saskatchewan schools had a newfound use for their language skills, as newcomers from Ukraine were given work placements on farms, oil rigs and local businesses. Masses and services at Ukrainian Catholic and Orthodox churches were, all of a sudden, standing room only on Sunday morning. Overall, on a per capita basis, Saskatchewan welcomed more Ukrainians than any other province in the months following Russia's invasion.

I have to say that designating Ukrainian heritage month is a fine idea, particularly for the people of Saskatchewan. Therefore, I certainly support Bill S-210. However, it is important to keep in mind that Bill S-210 is only a symbolic gesture. That is not to say that symbols are not important, because in a way, they are, but I wish the Liberal government would take some more tangible, concrete steps to support our friends and allies in Ukraine through their current struggles against the Russian invasion. In particular, the single most beneficial action that Canada could take to help Ukraine would be to sell more Canadian oil and gas to western Europe so those countries could stop buying from Russia. In fact, I said as much in a speech in the House four years ago.

When then finance minister Chrystia Freeland made her 2022 budget speech in the House, she received one standing ovation from all members of all parties. It was when she said that the Russian army invading Ukraine needed to be vanquished. I agreed then and I agree now that nothing would be better for the Ukrainian people than to get the Russian army off of Ukrainian soil. The best way to do this would be to displace Russian oil and gas sales to western Europe with Canadian oil and gas exports, thus making it financially impossible for Russia to continue the war.

As I said in my speech four years ago, exporting oil and gas to Europe requires pipelines. We need to build pipelines in this country by repealing the Liberals' anti-energy laws, including Bill C-69, the no more pipelines law, and Bill C-48, the west coast tanker ban, so that we could export Canadian energy and be a force for good in the world instead of enriching dictators such as Vladimir Putin and enabling them to wage war against Ukraine.

In the following four years since Chrystia Freeland's speech in the House of Commons, the inaction from the Liberal government has been disappointing to say the least. The Chancellor of Germany, the Prime Minister of Greece, the President of Poland and the President of the European Union have all asked the Liberal government for more Canadian energy exports to Europe, only to be told, quite famously by Justin Trudeau, that there was no strong business case for LNG exports from Canada to Europe. As a result, Russian troops continue to occupy Ukrainian soil, Russian rockets continue to rain down on Ukrainian cities and Ukrainians continue to suffer.

In conclusion, I support Bill S-210 to officially recognize Ukrainian heritage month, and I encourage all members to vote in favour of the bill. I also hope that it serves as a reminder to the Liberal government that there are some very tangible measures that it could be taking to help our friends and allies in Ukraine that would ensure that their culture and heritage remain strong for generations to come.

Slava Ukraini.

Energy Sector

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to table four petitions. I am, first off, very pleased to be tabling a petition in support of Canada's energy sector.

Petitioners highlight that Canada holds vast reserves of oil and gas that could stabilize global markets, support our democratic allies and power Canadian paycheques, but only if these resources can reach tidewater and diversified world markets. They highlight that global energy markets are now in acute disruption due to the war in the Middle East and threats to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, leaving our allies urgently searching for secure supplies from friendly democracies.

The Prime Minister, petitioners say, has promised to move with unimaginable speed to build now and to approve major projects quickly, yet his government has not approved a single new pipeline or major energy project, despite having been given exceptional powers by Parliament to do so. Petitioners observe that instead of delivering on those promises, the Prime Minister's government has doubled the deficit, presided over Canada's shrinking economy and turned a political ceremony and press release into a substitute for actual permits and construction.

Petitioners further highlight that Liberals introduced Bill C-69 and C-48, anti-development legislation that has blocked the shipment of oil to our coasts; and that Liberal red tape has made it take almost 18 years to open a mine, 23% longer than in Australia and 38% longer than in the United States, while investors, jobs and billions of dollars in economic activity have been driven to other countries.

Petitioners observe as well that Canada now exports 98% of its crude oil to the United States, leaving our producers and workers at the mercy of American policy and a single market, rather than getting world prices through pipelines and LNG terminals to the Pacific and Atlantic.

Therefore, petitioners call on the Government of Canada to repeal Bills C-69 and C-48 and replace them with a regulatory framework that protects the environment, respects indigenous rights and allows responsible energy projects to be built. They ask the government to commit to a clear, predictable and, at maximum, six-month decision timeline for approval of major energy and resource projects so investors, workers and communities can have certainty.

Finally, petitioners want the government to scrap the federal energy cap on Canadian oil and gas production so responsible, lower-emission Canadian energy can grow, compete globally and displace higher-emitting sources from hostile or unstable regimes.

I want to thank the petitioners for their hard work in bringing this important petition to Parliament.

Opposition Motion—Economic Policies

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak about an economic matter in the House of Commons today again.

Before I actually get into my speech, I want to talk about the broader terms we are talking about here. We are talking about what a recession is. Of course, there is a technical definition of a recession, but the real indication is usually in the rearview mirror. It is an indication that there has been a significant decline in economic activity that has spread across the economy and has lasted more than a few months. A wide range of data go into that, including GDP decline, which we have had and jobs decline, which we have. We are now at a 6.9% rate of unemployment. Other indications include incomes going down, which is clearly the case in Canada; production going down, so manufacturing and all these other industries that are actually declining in Canada at this point in time; and an inverted yield curve, which we had in 2023 and is usually an indicator that down the road we will enter a recession. All of these indicators are here right now, so we are looking at where we are going to be.

There is falling consumer confidence. Once people are losing their jobs and are out of work, we are going to see them participating less in the economy. That makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy because they pull in their spending. They decide to forgo the expenses that would lead us to where we need to go as an economy.

Rising bankruptcies are an indicator. Let us look at the debts that Canadians have right now. There is a significant amount of debt. We are the most indebted country in the G7. There are a whole bunch of statistics here. I know they are just statistics when we talk about numbers. They are not just statistics to real people who are losing their houses and are having to refinance their mortgage at higher rates. These are pain points that people are feeling across Canada and that we have to make sure that we are looking at rather effectively.

Let us think about our unemployment rate now. It was 6.9% this last month. When we had what is called a technical recession in the rearview mirror in 2015, the unemployment rate was 7%. That is 7% versus 6.9%. We are not far off from an unemployment indicator that would be severe for this country.

To get down to the real pain points here, we have half a million former students in Canada who are still unemployed and who do not have the jobs that they trained for in their educational institutions. These are real lives. They are real contributions that people are trying to make to our economy that are not being fulfilled right now. We need to move in that direction.

Payrolls are down, but let us think about where they have gone. Since 2023, we have 300,000 more public sector employees and what we call MUSH employees, municipalities, universities, schools and hospitals, and there is less private sector employment. That is a problem in an economy running a huge deficit, and we note that the current government is not shy about running higher deficits. That is what is contributing to inflation and what is going to contribute to the fact that we are going to have economic pain here going forward and we need to get ahead of that as quickly as possible.

GDP is going down. Labour productivity is not improving.

I want to talk about this motion today in support of Canadians who are increasingly asking a very simple question: Why is it getting harder to get ahead in this country? The debate is not just about G7 rankings. It is great to make sure we compare ourselves to other economies, but it is about whether Canadians feel progress in their daily lives.

In my riding of Calgary Centre and across the country, people are working hard, doing everything right and still finding themselves falling behind. That should concern every member of this House. The motion before us reflects a troubling pattern. Canada is underperforming relative to its peers. Growth is weak. Household debt is high. The unemployment rate is rising faster than in comparable economies. This did not happen overnight and it did not happen by accident. Choices have been made all the way along that have caused us to be exactly where we are right now.

For years, there were warning signs. Economists raised concerns about persistent deficits during periods of economic growth. My Conservative colleagues and I on this side of the House spoke about it repeatedly here. The Liberal government was told that continued spending without corresponding productivity gains would eventually create inflationary pressure. Those warnings were dismissed. We saw early signs of declining business investments, particularly in key sectors like energy. We saw capital beginning to leave the country. Those signals were ignored by the Liberal government.

We told the Liberal government that global demand for Canadian energy would remain strong, and it has, but instead of positioning Canada to meet that demand, the Liberals layered on uncertainty and delay through job-killing policies, like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, that told investors loud and clear to take their capital somewhere else, and that is exactly what they did, leaving Canadian workers and communities behind. Again, the warning signs were there, even on productivity.

Long before today, experts pointed out that Canada was falling behind our peers: less investment per worker, slower output growth and weak gains in competitiveness. None of this is new. The real concern is that these warning signs were not only ignored then; in many cases, they continue to be ignored now, because instead of correcting course by repealing Bill C-48 and urgently amending the Impact Assessment Act to provide certainty, the government has doubled down on the very approach that caused the problem: more regulation, more delay and more confusion for those looking to invest in Canada.

The signs have been clear for years. Economists warned us that persistent deficits would lead to inflation. Investors pointed out that regulatory uncertainty was driving them to look elsewhere. Workers saw opportunities dwindling in key sectors.

However, the Liberal government did not take these warnings seriously. Today, Canadians are paying the price. It is time to acknowledge these mistakes and change course to restore the conditions necessary for Canadians to succeed.

The consequences of these choices are now showing up in the daily lives of Canadians. Household debt has reached historic highs, not because Canadians are reckless, but because many have had to rely on credit to maintain their standard of living. At the same time, inflation drove up interest rates, and now families are facing the combined pressure of higher borrowing costs and higher everyday expenses. I hear it constantly. People who felt financially stable just a few years ago are now reassessing everything, from major investments to everyday spending. This is not abstract. This is real, and it is widespread.

Nowhere is the gap between potential and performance more obvious than in Canada's energy sector. We are one of the most resource-rich countries in the world. We have the expertise, the workforce and the environmental standards to be a global leader, and yet, at a time when the world was actively seeking secure, democratic sources of energy, Canada failed to step forward. That was a moment of opportunity, and we missed it. In Calgary, the consequences are clear. Investment decisions are delayed, projects face prolonged uncertainty and the new memorandum of understanding does very little to solve that problem.

Capital looks for more predictable environments. This is not because the resources are not in Canada. It is not because the talent is not in Canada. It is because the policy framework has not kept pace with reality. The world continues to need energy, and Canada should be part of that solution, responsibly, sustainably and competitively. This leads to a broader issue: productivity and investment.

Canada is falling behind. We are attracting less capital per worker than our closest peers. We are seeing weaker productivity growth, and over time, that erodes living standards. When investment slows, everything slows: job creation, wage growth and economic mobility. Investors are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for clarity, clear rules, predictable timelines and confidence that Canada is a place where long-term investment is welcome.

Today's motion calls for a plan, and rightly so. A credible plan must start with recognizing how we got here. Then it must focus on restoring the fiscal discipline to reduce inflationary pressures and rebuild economic confidence; re-establishing Canada as a destination for investment through clear, stable and competitive policies; and embracing a realistic approach to energy, one that supports both economic growth and environmental progress without undermining either, because growth is not accidental. It is the real result of consistent, coherent choices over time.

Canada has everything it needs to succeed, the resources, the talent, the entrepreneurial spirit, but potential is not enough. Without the right policies, opportunity is lost.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today on our motion.

Food Banks Canada had a stark warning, and this is a stark quote from its most recent report: “Something fundamental has shifted in Canada.” It goes on to further say that, in Canada, “a job is no longer enough to ensure a reliable pathway to stability.” One in four Canadians is facing food insecurity, and 20% of the 2.2 million lining up every month at food banks are employed. I am going to read again that line from the report: in Canada, “a job is no longer enough to ensure a reliable pathway to stability.” That is what over a decade of the Liberal government has inflicted upon Canada. Something has fundamentally changed in this country, and it has fundamentally changed for the worse because of the government.

In Edmonton alone, we have two separate food banks just serving veterans. Those who have served our country in the military, but also RCMP, have two separate food banks to serve them, just for them to get by. At the same time, we have the Prime Minister spending close to $200,000 for gourmet meals on his jet just for three trips, while the Liberals are spending $200 million for Liberal insiders for a concrete pad, a cement pad, in Nova Scotia.

Canada has entered recession territory. The Liberals will quibble and say that it is only a technical recession and really does not count, but the economy is shrinking: not just the last two quarters, but three of the last four quarters. We are the only G7 country with a shrinking economy. In fact, even basket cases like France and Italy do not have shrinking economies. We are in fact the only economy that has shrunk in the last four quarters in the G7. No one else has: not the U.S., not Germany, which continues on its path to net-zero economic suicide, and not Italy, without all the oil resources we have, but just us. Again, think of the old world, the G7, and all the issues they are having with the Ukraine war and being cut off from their natural gas resources, and yet somehow they have avoided a recession like ours.

This GDP issue reflects our stagnating standard of living and anemic productivity growth and highlights our weakness in business investments. According to the Fraser Institute, investment in plants, machinery equipment and IP has fallen 20% as a share of the economy in the last 10 years. I wonder what happened 10 years ago that would cause us to be on such a decline. Further, the last four years have seen this decline accelerate, matching about four years ago when the current Prime Minister started helping the government as a special economic adviser. What a coincidence, I know.

More sobering news is from the Bank of Canada monetary policy report. The member for Winnipeg North just previously was saying that the Liberals believe in the Bank of Canada and that the Bank of Canada has all the information, and he asked if we did not believe in the Bank of Canada. Well, I believe in the Bank of Canada monetary policy report, which actually shows that the government is misleading Canadians on growth. The Bank of Canada is predicting, next year, a 16% lower GDP growth than the government just did in its spring budget. The year after that, it is predicting a 13% lower growth. I ask the member for Winnipeg North whom he believes. Does he believe the Bank of Canada, as he just stated he does, or does he not now, when it is not convenient for him?

Even the Bank of Canada does not believe the government when it says that we are the fastest-growing economy in the G7. We are not.

Further, which is even more sobering, for 2026, of the anemic growth that we have under the Liberal government, the Bank of Canada is saying 75% is from added government spending. It is not from exporting oil, perhaps, and not from IP or investment, but from government spending. In 2027, 44% of the growth in the forecast is government spending. The year after, 25% of all the growth that the Bank of Canada is seeing in GDP is coming from government spending. This is not a way to grow out of the troubles we are in, by just simply borrowing more money and spending more money. Over the next five years, we are going to have almost $400 billion just in interest payments. What are we getting for it? We are not getting growth, like the one we see in the other countries. We are seeing a shrinking economy.

What do we do about this? Well, apart from joining Marty McFly and Doc Brown, getting into a DeLorean and going back to 2015 to ensure that Trudeau does not get elected, we can change the policies now. We can start undoing the Liberal policies that are wrecking the economy.

The Chamber of Commerce, just recently in a submission to the finance committee, said that the government needs to focus on competitiveness, and that we cannot compete globally because of a regulatory and red tape regime that is seen as cumbersome and anti-investment. We have well over 300,000 different rules and regulations, over 450 different acts, sometimes with thousands of regulations per act that are tying up and slowing our economic growth. What does the government do? Well, normal governments around the world would perhaps say, “Well, let us reduce red tape. Let us cut some of the red tape.”

We know defence procurement is a mess, but instead of actually addressing it, the government created another bureaucracy to work around its own rules that it created. For major projects, it is same thing, adding more bureaucracy to work around the other bureaucracy it created. Further, the government created another bureaucracy for red tape reduction, and 34 full-time equivalents were added to the bureaucracy to cut red tape.

We submitted an Order Paper question asking what the government managed to cut for regulations. With 34 full-time employees, we ended up with 29 regulations repealed. Here are some of them. They repealed UN regulations regarding Sierra Leone. Wow, that is going to grow the economy. They cut regulations on corded window covering products. They cut regulations regarding board elections for the Wheat Board, years after the Wheat Board went away. This is what 34 full-time employees managed to do over a period of a couple of years to cut red tape. They changed regulations on the Wheat Board elections for the board of directors of a Wheat Board that does not exist anymore.

How are we going to grow the economy if this is the best the government can do? We could get our energy products to market. We could build pipelines. We could get rid of the oil and gas emissions cap. The government will say that we do not have that anymore, but it has not come out and said that the cap is dead. We could get rid of the anti-Alberta tanker ban, Bill C-48. We have a private member's bill before this House right now to eliminate the tanker ban, and Liberals are opposing it. It is perfectly fine to have Saudi Arabia oil come up the St. Lawrence, but we cannot have Alberta oil off the north B.C. coast. We could get rid of the costly industrial carbon tax and the unconstitutional “no new pipelines” bill, Bill C-69.

If we want northern gateway to get built, which could add tens of billions of dollars of added growth to the economy, the government needs to get out of the way. It needs to kill Bill C-48, the anti-Alberta tanker ban. It needs to kill Bill C-69. It needs to get rid of the oil and gas emissions cap. We need to get rid of the government's determination to wreck our economy.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Madam Speaker, I am just quoting the Prime Minister. I know it is hard for the member to actually grasp his own leader's words, but that is what his own leader said. I am only quoting his own leader. If he does not like it, he can take it up with the Prime Minister.

Let us talk a bit more about some of the signs and the markers we have been seeing when we talk to Canadians. We have been telling the government for a couple of years now that the pressures on households are getting to be very tight. What we saw in quarter one was that over 37,000 Canadians filed for insolvency, just in Q1. That is the highest it has been since 2009, when there was an actual global recession and the housing market crashed around the globe. It has not been that high since then. That is what we have been seeing.

Let us look at household debt. Canadian household debt is 103% of GDP. Canadian non‑mortgage debt is $43,300, up from $40,200 two years ago, which was already a crazy high number. Now, when we look at the snapshot for just homeowners, non-mortgage debt is $82,400, up 19% in two years. Canadians are feeling the pressure and are putting more on their credit cards. It would appear that they are following what the government has been doing.

What has the government done? The government has been living off the credit card that the taxpayers basically provide it. Every single announcement the government makes is borrowed money. The government has been running on constant deficits for a very long time. We saw a bit of a recent influx in government revenues because oil prices have gone a bit higher and the government actually benefited from that. What did the Liberals do? They spent it. They blew it. The deficit for this year alone is almost $80 billion.

Let us take a look at what the national debt looks like. Canada is over $1.3 trillion in debt. That number is massively rising every single day.

What is the Bank of Canada telling us? Well, there is 523 billion dollars' worth of debt that has to be refinanced. That was refinanced when the former prime minister said, “Interest rates are at [all‑time] lows, Glen”: 1%. It is now being recalled at 3%, so the share for every Canadian, just on that number alone, is going from $1,500 to $1,900 because of that jump from 1% to 3%. That is going to have a massive impact, and that is just in the short term. There is longer‑term interest that is going to be up for renewal as the years go on, and those rates are going to be higher and higher. We have a continually snowballing and cascading effect that is going to rock Canadian households.

Let us take another look at what is happening in the business world. Business capital investment fell 0.7% in quarter one, which was the fifth straight quarter that business investment in Canada has fallen. This comes after a 10-year run with the Liberal government when foreign direct investment of over $1 trillion left Canada. For every dollar that came in, two dollars left. That is what we are seeing here. That is the by-product of what is happening today.

When we look at some of the other statistics from the Bank of Canada and a few others, they mention that government spending was down 2.5% and that is what caused a bit of a drop in GDP. The fact that it is government spending that is also driving that shows the government is the one trying to artificially prop up the economy. The private sector is struggling. We are not seeing massive private sector investment. There are a couple projects here and there, but we are just not seeing the large-scale investment that is required.

Let us look at what the Liberals wanted to do. Coming out of the election, they said they wanted to build at speeds not yet seen. What did they propose to the House? It was Bill C-5. They said they needed Bill C-5 because that was going to allow them to do what? It was to override their own bad laws they had put in place, because they recognized that was the problem. They said they needed Bill C-5 so they could circumvent their own laws that they had created. We said it would be better if they just scrapped the bad laws but that we would play ball and help them out, so we worked with the government to pass Bill C-5. We put some safeguards in there to make sure the Prime Minister was not greasing the palms of his buddies at Brookfield, and we helped them pass Bill C-5.

Then they put projects on the list. There are a couple of LNG projects on there. They have been on that list now for well over 250 days. We are closing in on almost a year with some of these projects listed, and there has been no movement. Nothing is happening. Germany came here and said it wanted our LNG, and the government said, “Sure, this time we'll work with you to make sure you get some LNG.” When did it say we would deliver the LNG to Germany? It was sometime in the 2030s. There is no fixed date because the government does not actually know. What did Germany do? When the former prime minister said there was no business case, Germany went home and built an import terminal in 194 days. That is a shorter amount of time than the projects have been on the Major Projects Office list with nothing being done.

What have Conservatives done? Well, we proposed the Canadian sovereignty act because we wanted to help the government get out of its own way. We proposed that in the same way we are doing here today, with an opposition day motion, to give the government a template to kind of get the ball rolling, to help it advance the football down the field, per se. The Liberals voted against it. They had an opportunity to implement another one of our great plans, and they voted no.

They took our advice and scrapped the consumer carbon tax. Now they are saying this is one of the greatest cost-saving moves they have ever made, and that is because Conservatives were right. It was Conservatives who put the pressure on them to do it, and eventually they relented.

Maybe if they would implement the Canadian sovereignty act, which would repeal the bad laws like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, that would get them on the right track and get them going, because Bill C-5 was supposed to be the mechanism to help them circumvent those laws. If they would implement the Canadian sovereignty act, it would get them going in the right direction. It would also get rid of the industrial carbon tax, which we know is putting massive downward pressure on investment in Canada because nowhere else around the world wants the same type of pricing mechanism that the government is going to enforce on Canadian industry. It is going to be devastating to Canadians.

The Liberals should look at what Conservatives are proposing. We have had some great ideas that would help them and that probably would have helped them avoid entering this recession, which has been made by the Liberal government. If they want to work with us, we have great ideas. They have said no to many of them, and now they have to pay for that, which means Canadians have to pay for it because the government has no money. It is only because Canadians pay taxes and the government prints money against the future of Canadians that it acquires any money. At this point in time, if it wants to get the economy rolling, the government could take some of our great ideas that we have proposed, and that would actually help it avoid this recession.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member is absolutely right. At a time when the Prime Minister needs to present a plan to Canadians for plunging them into this Liberal recession, he is hiding. In fact, just yesterday, he did the whole Biden point, which is pointing to where he was going when asked a question and just walking that way. What he needs to do is present a plan.

My colleagues started off by saying the Liberals copied our plan when we said to axe the carbon tax. That is where they started. Let us put some other solutions in front of them right now: cancel the industrial carbon tax; bring down the cost of food and everyday life; cancel all the antidevelopment laws that the Liberal government put in place that do not let a new pipeline, a new mine, a new dam or any infrastructure get built; cancel Bill C-69; get rid of the tanker ban, Bill C-48, and my colleague from Calgary has a bill currently in the House so we can get our product not just to the West Coast, but off the west coast into the Asian markets; and get rid of the industrial carbon tax so that we can make Canada more competitive.

The world needs what Canada has. We just need the Liberal government to get out of the way.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

moved:

That the House recognize that the Liberal Prime Minister has given Canada the:

(i) only economy in recession in the G7,

(ii) worst household debt in the G7,

(iii) worst housing costs in the G7,

(iv) second highest unemployment in the G7, a third higher than in the United States;

accordingly, the House call on the Liberal Prime Minister to immediately present a plan to reverse all the economic policies of the Liberal government which have given Canada the G7's worst economy.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to be splitting my time with my great friend, and a decent hockey player, the member for Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley.

Where is this Prime Minister? He has been hiding, ducking and dodging since Friday morning. This is the guy who was supposed to be a master negotiator, the guy who would get a deal done. He said he was the guy who would get Canada back on track, and he said he was the man with the plan. However, it all turned out to be a sham at the end of the day because on Friday morning, Canadians got the devastating news of something that they have already been feeling in the last 10 years under the incompetent Liberal government: Canada is in a full-blown Liberal recession.

In fact, this Liberal Prime Minister is the only leader in the entire G7 to drive the economy into a full-blown recession. All of the other G7 countries face the exact same external pressures and the exact same tariffs. Why is it that this Prime Minister, who was supposed to be the guy, plunged our economy into a recession? In fact, in the entire OECD, Canada is one of only two countries that are in a recession now.

Liberal pundits and their paid media keep saying this is just a technical recession. What is a technical recession? This full-blown Liberal recession meets the criteria with two consecutive quarters in a shrinking economy, but let us look at the time since this Prime Minister took power. In three out of the four quarters since he became Prime Minister, the economy has shrunk. Business investment has declined for five straight quarters and $20 billion of net investment has fled the country since he became Prime Minister. Just in the first three months of this year, 120,000 jobs are gone and 48,000 of those people are still looking for work.

This Prime Minister delivered to Canada the second-worst unemployment rate in the entire G7. He is the worst when it comes to housing costs. In the entire G7, Canada, under this Prime Minister, is the worst when it comes to household debt. Let us dig into that a bit. What does this recession mean? It may be technical to the paid media, but in Canadian terms, it is the single mom who has to put groceries back because she cannot afford them or she has to buy in portions every week because the cost of living has skyrocketed under the Liberals. Including food costs and housing costs, everyday life is more expensive because of Liberal taxes and the failure of Liberal policies.

It is the dad in Windsor who has lost his job. He is one of the 120,000 people who, in the first three months of this year under the Liberal government, lost their job. He has to sit around the dinner table explaining to the kids how many things they cannot do over the summer and how many vacations they cannot have because he is more worried about how he is going to pay the bills, pay the mortgage or rent and put food on that table. It is the mom who just got laid off and was barely hanging on. It could be one of the majority of Canadians who are just $200 away from insolvency. It could be one of those 2.2 million Canadians who are waiting in a food bank line every single month, and that number might even go up now because of the job losses under the current government.

This Prime Minister sold himself to be something different. He said he would not be like the previous guy. He is actually worse, so he is right in one sense. Not only is he spending more, if one can believe that. He doubled the deficit that Justin Trudeau left. Then, he corrected himself in the update and became the second-worst as well, having the second-worst deficit in Canadian history outside COVID. That means more costs, more debt and more taxes on Canadians. It is more of the same and it is all on the Canadian credit card. He does not care. This guy is better at going around and shaking a lot of hands, signing a bunch of fake papers and jet-setting around the world. However, it does not just stop at jet-setting around the world. He makes sure he has the finest meals on those planes. In fact, he just recently spent $200,000 on fine dining on those plane rides.

While Canadians are lining up in record numbers at food banks, and the food banks are even running out of food now, the Prime Minister gets to live lavishly, jet-setting around the world, pretending he is doing something. After all that showboating and all of that show, at the end of the day, he has plunged Canada's economy into a full-blown Liberal recession. There are families who are affected and who had been affected before.

In fact, in the business community, for consecutive quarters, there are more businesses closing in Canada than are opening. Business insolvencies are up. People are starting to miss their mortgage and credit card payments. The cost of everyday life has only gotten worse under the incompetent Liberal Prime Minister. In fact, if we look at debt loads, Canada has the highest debt load in the entire G7. Because of Liberal policies, the costs of food and housing are way up, and just those two pieces alone now make up about 120% of one person's income. That means someone's entire paycheque gets eaten up and then they have to either borrow, or put on credit, for food or other essentials. Then, that just piles up, and they start missing payments, which is exactly what is happening now.

The number of defaults, delinquencies and insolvencies are all up. We have not seen some of these numbers since 2009, when we literally had a global financial crisis, and the difference back then was that we had a really responsible Conservative government that knew where to spend money and that knew how to create jobs at the time. We never saw an inflation crisis the last time this happened. I do not remember an inflation crisis. I do not remember interest rates spiking at the highest and fastest rate in Canadian history. That medal goes to the incompetent Liberal government, because all it does is spend, spend, spend, because it does not mean anything to the government.

The Prime Minister is more concerned about his banker, bondholder and Brookfield buddies than he is about the average everyday Canadian. In fact, he is the same Prime Minister who sold the illusion that he was the guy who was going to deal with Donald Trump. He was all “elbows up”. Now everything is down, including our economy. We are in a recession, and now the Prime Minister is on team Trump. In fact, now he is parroting Donald Trump. Now it is “make America great again”. However, I ask, “What about Canada?” We might as well get the Prime Minister a MAGA hat.

What we are asking for today is that the incompetent Liberal Prime Minister present a plan, stop hiding and come out of the witness protection program. He is supposed to be leading this G7 country, the same one that he has driven into a recession. He must tell Canadians what his plan is.

Conservatives have a plan. If the Liberals want a plan that will help us get out of this mess that they created, they can take our plan and take credit for it. They can put their stamp on it, and at least Canadians would have a future that is more safe and more affordable. Conservatives would end the antidevelopment laws that the Liberals passed, like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which does not let our product leave the west coast and does not let pipelines get built. We would get rid of the industrial carbon tax, which makes the cost of everything more expensive. We would lower taxes for individuals, small businesses and corporations, so we can create the business environment that we need. We would introduce a law so that, any time a Canadian company reinvests its capital gains in Canada, they would not have to pay those capital gains taxes. They could defer them, so we could create better jobs and a better economy right here in Canada.

Of course, we would put an end to all the Liberal waste: the billions and billions of dollars that go to Liberal-connected insiders in consultant fees because the Liberal ministers are too incompetent to create plans of their own, and the boondoggle of a project that is Alto. The government, for a project that has not even started yet, has already shovelled out millions in bonuses. We would put an end to this Liberal corruption.

The Liberals can take our plan. Let us get working for Canadians together. It is time for the Prime Minister to come out of hiding and present a plan.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the fine member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

The costliest budget in Canadian history outside of COVID is back to haunt us once again. This is the biggest deficit outside of COVID that the government dropped on top of Canadians, and it is back. It is back to traumatize them once again. Canadians are visiting food banks at record numbers. Insolvencies are up and Canadians just cannot afford the cost of living. With the crisis that the current Liberal government created, Canadians are being reminded once again of how irresponsible the Liberal government is with Canada's finances, and the tough position that the Liberal government put Canadians in.

In fact, in the current Liberal government, this out-of-touch Prime Minister says that affordability is the best it has been in a decade. By every measure in every Canadian's life today, that is simply untrue. One just has to go to the grocery store. This Prime Minister admits he does not do his own groceries, so it does not really matter to him. When people go to the grocery store or fill up their gas tank, or just in everyday life, everything has gotten expensive.

When we dig deep into why that has happened, we see that ever since the Liberals formed government, everything got worse. The economy got worse. Crime got worse in this country. This did not happen by accident or by some global forces, which the Liberal government always likes to blame. This happened because of changes that the Liberal government itself made.

Before the Liberal government, when we had a sound, responsible, strong Conservative government, the middle class was one of the strongest in the entire world. In fact, there used to be articles written back then saying that the American dream had moved to Canada. However, it did not take long for the Liberal government to come in and destroy all that great work, and then the Canadian dream went away.

When I was growing up, it was not uncommon to have one household income to run a house. People could afford a house back then, too. These failed Liberal policies, these out-of-control deficits, changing laws to make it easier for repeat offenders to get out, and all the bad economic policies that the Liberals imposed on Canada, which drove out $1 trillion of Canadian investment to the U.S., ended up making Canada more unsafe and more unaffordable than ever before.

It was this Liberal Prime Minister who was advising the then prime minister, Justin Trudeau, that the interest rates would be low for a long time, so people should go out and buy and spend as much as they want. After giving that advice, he gave other pieces of advice that completely made Canadians' lives miserable. That was to make sure that the Liberals spent and racked up deficits on Canadians. In fact, there was the most growth in the deficit and the most spending that ever happened in Canadian history at that time. Canadians' bank accounts were wiped out and their cabinets were wiped out of food. That is why we now see 2.2 million Canadians going to food banks. The cost of housing has gone up. The cost of food has gone up. The cost of gas has gone up. All of that is because of Liberal taxes and Liberal policies.

Canadians are working harder than ever now. In fact, who is using those food banks is becoming more and more concerning. It is now people in households of two income earners who are going into food bank lines, because their incomes are still the same, but everything else has gone up. The cost of housing has gone up because of inflation that the current government created. Rents skyrocketed under the Liberals. There are food taxes, including the industrial carbon tax and the clean fuel standard. There are all these other things. Driving out investment also drove out competition, which would have helped bring down the cost of food and fuel.

Whereas the out-of-touch Liberal government only took off 10¢ per litre, a third of the tax for a third of the year, Conservatives were calling for all fuel taxes to be removed for all of the year. That would have helped save families 25¢ per litre, or $1,200 for the whole year. That would have been real savings. Conservatives would also completely remove this carbon tax in the form of a clean fuel standard that the Liberals implemented.

When we look at the economy, $1 trillion has left. Why did it leave? Let us look at some of the projects that could have been built, but were not, under the government because of its radical eco ideology. Nothing is getting built. In fact, the Liberals have put up even more barriers so that nothing could be built in the last 11 years. Bill C-69, the “no new pipelines” bill, ensures nothing can be built in this country, whether it is a pipeline, mine or dam. In fact, when I talked to a mining company in B.C., they said that it takes about 18 years just to get a permit approved, and that is a maybe. What Canadian would want to invest in a project like a mine that may get built in 18 years?

Then the Liberals put up Bill C-48, the tanker ban, which does not let our product leave the west coast and go to the Asian markets. They introduced the industrial carbon tax, which makes Canada less competitive, but also makes the cost of the goods that Canadians buy more expensive: food, fuel and any other goods.

The Prime Minister says that no one uses steel. He is obviously out of touch. Canadians are using steel; it is in almost everything. When someone is building a home, there is steel in that home. It is also in cars and a lot of other goods. Steel is very much being used, yet the Liberals put an industrial carbon tax on it. That is the hidden tax that, at the end of the day, whoever is buying the goods has to pay. Canadians are paying it. It is bad, reckless Liberal policy.

Canadians are stuck with the bill, which is why we see record food bank usage. When we look at Canadian households, one in four now are food-insecure. These are not stats that we heard about before; not until the Liberal government took over. Right now, Canadian households are the most indebted in the G7 because the cost of everything has gone up and, as I said, incomes have not moved at all. In fact, Canadian household debt has reached $2.6 trillion in Q4. For every dollar of disposable income that Canadians earn, they owe approximately $1.77.

We are seeing delinquencies go up as well. In the first three months of the year, 1.4 million Canadians have missed a payment on a credit card or mortgage. Canadians are putting essentials, more and more, on their credit cards, and they are either putting everything else back on the shelves because they cannot afford it that week, or making really tough decisions they should not have to make. We need to turn that around.

Under a Conservative government, we would get rid of these antidevelopment laws, including Bill C-69, Bill C-48 and the industrial carbon tax, so we could get many different projects up and going, including LNG, oil and gas, pipelines, mines and dams. Whatever they are, not only would Canada be more self-reliant, but we would create good jobs and a good economy. That would not only serve Alberta; that would help the unity crisis that the out-of-touch Liberal government has created. In fact, it would help Canada, and it could help the world because we could have our low-carbon energy in places that need it the most around the world. We would also cap government spending and the wasteful spending of the Liberal government. We would bring back the Canada that we all knew, where hard work would earn Canadians a good paycheque with low taxes. With that same paycheque, they should be able to afford groceries and a house in a safe neighbourhood.

That is what a Conservative government will do when we come back.

An Act to repeal certain restrictions on shipping

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise to support the private member's bill concerning Bill C-48.

It is mind-boggling to watch the government continue to deny Alberta, and to also deny the facts around the system and the facts around the issue of the incredible contribution that the energy industry makes to Canadian finances and will make in the future as well. We have seen reports that say that losing the northern gateway has cost Canada $20 billion in lost revenue since the Liberal government cancelled it.

The Liberals wonder who is going to bring a new pipeline to Canada and invest billions of dollars. The government wants industry to spend an extra $20 billion for carbon capture. Who is going to spend that to develop a pipeline to nowhere, as the government is proposing, with $20 billion just for the carbon capture, on top of perhaps another $15 billion to get a pipeline to the coast, only to have the Liberal government say no to Alberta oil off the B.C. coast”?

At the same time, the same Liberal government allows hundreds of oil tankers up and down the St. Lawrence and off the east coast, while in B.C., where we have never had a single major spill, the government, not for scientific reasons or financial reasons but for purely ideological reasons, is saying no to bringing Alberta oil to off the B.C. coast.

The private member's bill would end the tanker ban off the B.C. coast and would bring untold wealth to the country when we need it and energy sovereignty when we need it. What better way is there to fight against the Trump tariffs and the economic uncertainty than building this in Canada now?

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to speak to Bill C-264, and I will say at the outset what the central problem with this bill is. It is a one-line proposition dressed up as serious policy. It is a slogan in legislative form. It asks this Parliament to do something that the legislative record, the scientific record, the consultation record and the conservation record of this country have all decided against repeatedly over 50 years under prime ministers of every party. Perhaps we should take a walk down memory lane and look at history.

In 1972, the House passed a resolution declaring that “the movement of oil by tanker along the coast of British Columbia...is inimical to Canadian interests”. It said “inimical”. That was the language of this Parliament in 1972.

In 1985, a Conservative prime minister named Brian Mulroney established a voluntary tanker exclusion zone along the north coast of British Columbia. It was a Tory prime minister, a Tory cabinet and a Tory decision, and a good one at that.

In 1988, that exclusion zone was formalized through coordination between the Canadian Coast Guard, the United States Coast Guard and the Reagan administration. A Conservative government and a Republican government worked together to protect the environment, imagine that. Now a Conservative opposition in Ottawa is working to undo exactly that.

Let us think back to 1989. The Exxon Valdez ran aground in Prince William Sound. Thousands of kilometres of coastline were contaminated. A herring fishery collapsed and is still not yet fully recovered. Marine ecosystems were damaged in ways that are still being studied today. That disaster reinforced what Canadian governments had already concluded: The risk on that coast is unique, and the consequences of failure are too great. Members from British Columbia, particularly, are concerned about this. While I appreciate the concern for the environment from our members from Alberta, this is a particular problem that affects British Columbia, but it should affect the sensibility of all Canadians.

For 34 years, this voluntary moratorium held, through four Conservative prime ministers and four Liberal prime ministers. None of them moved to repeal it, and none of them tried.

In 2017, our government introduced Bill C-48, the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, to give that 34-year consensus the force of statute. It passed the House with support from members of four of five parties represented. That is the history, and that is what this slogan, or this bill, proposes to overturn.

The members opposite are not making a science-based case for repeal. They are not bringing forward new evidence about the risk on the north coast. They are not presenting a new technology or a new spill response capacity that changes that calculus. They are not pointing to a change in the vulnerability of that coast. They are bringing forward a one-line bill, with no consultation, no indigenous engagement and no environmental review, that asks Parliament to undo half a century of careful policy because it might look good in a social media clip.

I want to make a point that I think the members opposite have not fully thought through, and I say this in the spirit of genuine concern for the credibility of debate in this institution. If the members opposite truly believe that a pipeline to the north coast of British Columbia is the future of Canadian energy, passage of this bill would be the worst possible way to pursue that future. The moment that this bill comes to a vote, it would galvanize every coastal first nation, every B.C. municipality, every environmental organization, every one of us who is concerned about the environment and every legal team in the country who has spent decades preparing for exactly this fight. It would guarantee injunctions. It would guarantee litigation. It would guarantee gridlock.

If I were being cynical about it, I might encourage members opposite to proceed and encourage us to vote for it, to tie that up in the courts. Passing this bill would be the single most effective way to ensure that no pipeline ever gets built to the north coast of British Columbia, because the legal and political response that this bill on its own would trigger would be exactly that. That is not how to build big things in this country. That is how to make sure they never get built, and the proof of that is the years of Conservative government when not a single pipeline was built and no progress was made in protecting the environment, all at once. It was quite remarkable.

Let us talk about the substantive case for why this moratorium should stand. First is the nature of the coast itself. The waters from the northern tip of Vancouver Island to the Alaska border are some of the most biologically productive seas on the planet, habitat for over 25 species of marine animals and spawning grounds for salmon runs that sustain ecosystems. This is not any ordinary coastline.

The second is the nature of that risk. Crude oil tankers are vessels carrying volumes of persistent oil that, in the event of a failure, cannot be cleaned up. A herring fishery collapsed after the Exxon Valdez, and as I said earlier, it has still not recovered. The Nathan E. Stewart tug ran aground near Bella Bella in 2016. There was a diesel spill, and the Heiltsuk Nation is still measuring the consequences of that a decade later.

The third is the obligation to coastal first nations, something that seems like an inconvenience to members opposite. The Coastal First Nations alliance has made its position clear, repeatedly, for decades. They are rights holders whose constitutional position is at the centre of it. Those nations have spoken loud and clear, and I would encourage members opposite to speak to them directly to hear their voices.

The fourth pillar is, of course, the alternatives. There is already a pipeline to tidewater in this country, TMX. Expanded and operational, it is moving Canadian energy to global markets through the port of Vancouver, where the safety architecture, the spill response capacity, the marine traffic management and the indigenous consultation frameworks are all built around that infrastructure. Canadian energy has access to the Pacific. It has access to the markets that it needs to be going to, and we are working hard to ensure that, in the cleanest, greenest way possible, we continue to make that possible under the right conditions. It does not need access at the cost of a coastline that this Parliament, 50 years ago, declared inimical to Canadian interests to put at risk.

Unless every single box is checked and all of the criteria are met to the satisfaction of all parties involved, there is no reason for a new pipeline to go through the north coast. If the science has changed, if science tells us something different and if indigenous consultations tell us something different, then we should all be having that conversation, but a one-line bill that proposes to change history just because it would look good is not how serious governments should make decisions.

This is a government that believes in evidence. It is a government that believes in science. This is a government that believes in building a strong economy and protecting a healthy future for our environment. We believe these are not opposites. Quite the opposite, in fact, we believe they are part of the same future.

We have demonstrated that. We have ensured Trans Mountain's viability. We signed a Canada-Alberta memorandum of understanding, which put a $130-per-tonne price floor under industrial carbon pricing in Alberta. We have secured an agreement in principle for a 75% reduction in methane emissions from Alberta's oil and gas sector by 2035. We have launched a joint electricity working group with Alberta to build a net-zero grid by 2050, including transmission interties that will finally allow British Columbia to export clean hydroelectric power eastward.

Let us also look at the facts. From 2014 to 2025, bitumen production in this country grew by 63%. Alberta's royalties from 2021 to 2025 totalled $58 billion, nearly four times what they were in the previous seven years combined. At the same time as this happened, under a Liberal government, we were also able to preserve and protect 6,700 square kilometres on the north coast of British Columbia, larger than the size of P.E.I., in a nature reserve.

That is how intelligent, managed, evidence-based energy policy works. It looks like signing an MOU. It looks like pricing carbon, cutting methane, respecting indigenous rights and our natural environment, and protecting our coast. It looks like building big things and protecting what no amount of private sector intervention can replace. What it does not look like is a one-line bill repealing 50 years of conservation policy because it polls well in a fundraising email for Conservatives. We owe Canadians better than that. We owe the next generation better than that. My son is in the lobby watching this speech today. I owe him better than that. We all do. We owe the coastal communities of British Columbia better than that. The case for repeal has not been made.

I will be voting against Bill C-264. I urge every member of the House who has a conscience, who cares about the coastline of British Columbia and who cares about our environmental future and about building a prosperous economy to do the same.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

moved that Bill C-264, An Act to repeal certain restrictions on shipping, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to rise in the House today to speak on behalf of the residents of Calgary Signal Hill.

“The...MOU will build a pipeline”. Canada's Prime Minister made that statement in the House just four months ago. Of course, the Prime Minister was referring to the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Province of Alberta and the federal government just six months ago.

Since that time, the Prime Minister has made a number of statements promising Canadians additional oil export capacity by pipeline for the single most valuable natural resource exported by Canada. For example, the Prime Minister said less than two weeks ago, “we will advance a potential pipeline to transport at least one million barrels of low-emission Alberta oil a day to new markets.” That statement is consistent with what the Prime Minister said a year ago: “If you want a simple answer on ‘Will I support...a pipeline?’ Yes. That simple answer. I’ve given that multiple times.”

Over and above the statements of the Prime Minister, the Province of Alberta and the federal government, just 10 days ago, signed an implementation agreement respecting the November MOU. The implementation agreement says that Alberta will submit a comprehensive proposal for an oil pipeline to Asian markets to the Major Projects Office by July 1, just over five weeks from now, and, second, that “Canada will pursue [its designation] as a project of national interest for approval under the Building Canada Act by October 1, 2026”. We might just be getting somewhere.

Members may be wondering if the bill up for debate right now is indeed Bill C-264, an act to repeal the west coast tanker ban. After all, I have mentioned nothing about ships or tankers, just pipelines. The fact is that a precondition of the construction of a new crude oil export pipeline is the ability to load the oil transported by that pipeline onto a tanker for delivery to international markets. While Canada presently loads hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude oil onto ships through the Westridge terminus of the Trans Mountain pipeline at Burnaby, B.C., Bill C-48, the west coast tanker ban, prevents shipment from the northern B.C. coast.

Greg Ebel, the CEO of Enbridge, Canada's biggest crude oil shipper, said, “No company would build a pipeline to nowhere.” Further, Mr. Ebel stated, “The tanker ban is a great example of how things will have to change to allow our country to maximize its economic potential. Let markets and real demand guide routes and capacities while government focuses on enabling the conditions for success.” Truer words are seldom spoken.

Let us put these pieces together. The Prime Minister wants a pipeline built. Industry will build a pipeline and fill it with oil if that oil can be loaded onto tankers on Canada's west coast for export. Therefore, our next logical step is to repeal Bill C-48, the west coast Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, to allow for the safe and responsible ocean transport of crude oil that has been safely and responsibly produced here in Canada.

There is good news, and it is only Tuesday. The Conservatives are here to help, and Bill C-264 is just what the doctor ordered: a repeal of the tanker ban so that the way would be clear for the construction of a new crude oil export pipeline and an increase in the safe and responsible shipment of Canadian oil to our international trading partners and allies across Asia.

The demand for responsibly produced Canadian energy, including crude oil, has already been made clear. Nations that are not energy self-sufficient are interested in Canada as an energy supplier. We are a stable, democratic nation with environmental standards that are second to none, and we are a supplier of choice. Countries including India, Indonesia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan, the very countries with which the Prime Minister is trying to grow our trading relationships, want Canadian energy.

While we have a great deal to gain by eliminating the west coast tanker ban, Canada also has something to lose if we do not take this opportunity to remove obstacles and develop the capacity to supply our international trading partners. Tim McMillan, former minister of energy and resources for the Province of Saskatchewan, was CEO of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers in 2019 when he stated, “Bill C-48 has the potential to permanently block Canada from exporting its responsibly produced natural resources to growing international markets, preventing us from helping to displace global greenhouse gas emissions and lift other nations out of energy poverty.”

Martha Hall Findlay, former Liberal member of Parliament, was markedly more blunt when she said the tanker ban “was bad legislation and the government should get rid of it.” Ms. Hall Findlay identified a different approach from that taken by the current Liberal government with Bill C-48, when she said, “There are better alternatives to C-48, such as setting aside what are called Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas, which have been established in areas such as the Great Barrier Reef and the Galapagos Islands.”

Why do we have Bill C-48? When the Liberals put the tanker ban in place, they argued that it was necessary for protecting the environment. That argument is completely inconsistent with the reality of commercial shipping on Canada's west coast. Nearly a century of tanker traffic has sailed the west coast without a serious oil spill of Canadian crude. Tankers are statistically safer than cars, airplanes, trains and even oil pipelines, when we look at the number of shipments safely transported. Right now the port of Vancouver loads roughly 400 oil tankers each year, and there have been no spills. Our safety standards are world-class, and our safety record proves it.

The Liberals also argued that the tanker ban was required in order to protect the Hecate Strait in particular, because it is difficult to navigate and supposedly remarkably dangerous. This argument does not seem to have a basis in scientific fact. There are no Transport Canada risk analyses that describe the strait as particularly challenging. B.C. passenger ferries travel through the strait on a regular basis. The Prince Rupert Port Authority says the Hecate Strait is “a deep, ice free inlet with easy access and can be entered at all times and in all seasons.”

When it comes to rough weather, I have been told by a former port authority employee that the high-tech solution is to wait. Satellite weather analysis and modern technology mean that ship captains can see rough conditions coming or see when they exist, and they simply wait out those conditions.

The fact is that loaded oil tankers have passed through the Hecate Strait in the last half-dozen years during the existence of the tanker ban. There have not been many passages, but it does happen. I would suggest that it is not well known that these voyages have occurred from time to time, because the tankers have transited the Hecate Strait safely and without incident.

It is important to note that oil tankers do not need to pass through the Hecate Strait to transport crude oil from the northern B.C. port of Prince Rupert. Rather, ships headed to international ports would sail through the Dixon Entrance and into the open ocean. The Dixon Entrance is a body of water that is 13 kilometres wide at its narrowest point. By way of illustration, 289 tankers would fit side by side across that distance of 13 kilometres.

I want to speak to the safety of our maritime shipping industry. Today's tanker fleet is double-hulled, it sails using GPS navigation technology, it is extensively monitored, and when close to shore it requires escort tugs and marine pilots specifically trained on the waters that the ship is in. Tankers and commercial shipping are very safe, and we should be supporting and celebrating the capacity that exists on our west coast, rather than doubting the ability of our seafaring professionals to get this job done and done right.

While overall safety is very high, marine accidents can and do happen. The most common causes, however, are not dangerous waters or freak weather occurrences but ship collisions and groundings. These accidents, logically, tend to happen when ships are near ports, and particularly when the ports are congested. The port of Vancouver currently suffers from congestion issues and aging infrastructure, and the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion has already increased tanker traffic there. Additional port capacity at Prince Rupert and Kitimat can reduce the pressure on the port of Vancouver and increase shipping safety.

Again, former Liberal MP Ms. Hall Findlay was succinct on the subject of shipping risk. She said, “There are risks associated with any kind of transportation with any goods, and not all of them are with oil tankers. All that singling out one part of one coast did was prevent more oil and gas from being produced that could be shipped off that coast”.

Those who feel our west coast tanker waters are too dangerous for crude oil tankers must be wondering how different our east coast is from our west coast. On Canada's east coast, roughly 240 tanker trips every year move crude oil on the St. Lawrence River between storage in Montreal and refining facilities outside of Quebec City. In Newfoundland and Labrador, about 90 oil tankers visit the Whiffen Head facility every year to load crude oil.

Denise Mullen, director of environment, sustainability and indigenous relations at the Business Council of British Columbia, said this about the west coast tanker ban: “Comparable shipments face no such restrictions on the East Coast.... This unfair treatment reinforces Canada’s over-reliance on the U.S. market, where Canadian oil is sold at a discount, by restricting access to Asia-Pacific markets.”

It is 100% clear that the Canadian energy sector is the financial backbone of our country. That is something that I and hundreds of thousands of Canadians engaged in the responsible production of Canadian oil and gas are rightfully proud of. In the face of this fact, it is not just self-defeating to maintain the west coast tanker ban but simply nonsensical.

Denise Mullen, with the Business Council of British Columbia, as I mentioned, said it well. She said the tanker ban “results in billions in lost government revenues and reduced private investment at a time when our economy can least afford it.”

The Liberal tanker ban was always about shutting down Canadian oil production, not safety or environmental protection. For more than half a decade now, the Liberal west coast tanker ban has been a roadblock to true nation building. It has not been just a piece of legislation. It has been a project killer. It is part of the Liberal anti-energy agenda that over the last decade effectively ended the northern gateway pipeline and the indigenous-owned Eagle Spirit energy project.

We must pause to consider the gravity of these facts. If those projects had been allowed to move forward, Canada would already be providing energy security to countries like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and India, not just talking about it. Our energy industry is world-leading in advanced technologies, environmental safety and impact; creates thousands of high-paying jobs; and fosters real economic reconciliation with indigenous communities. Our energy industry deserves our support, real and concrete support through action, not just words and high-minded ideas.

Our Conservative caucus supported the government legislation that created the Major Projects Office. It was, and is, not the best solution to getting our country building again, but it was a small step in the right direction. Right now, we need to take another step in the right direction: repeal the tanker ban and further clear the way to making Canada a true energy superpower.

We must focus on the facts, focus on the science, trust the experts in marine shipping who will work with local communities, work with indigenous communities, and work with fishers and other marine transporters and shippers to ensure that shipping of all descriptions will be safe and secure. We need to reject sea stories and hysteria and have confidence that we can ship crude oil and do it safely.

I give the last word to Martha Hall Findlay, former Liberal member of Parliament, as I mentioned, who said, “I’m hoping that we see the revival of a federal government that brings pragmatism to governing the country.... Repealing [Bill] C-48 would be a sign of that happening.”

I have, I am sure, just a few seconds left. I received an interesting email from a resident in North Vancouver. Her name is Andrea, and she writes, “I've been very frustrated with this tanker ban. No such thing set up for the east, so why B.C.? This has always seemed too extreme. We have tankers coming and going in the Salish Sea, Georgia Strait, Vancouver Harbour and especially the very narrow and relatively shallow Lions Gate Bridge entrance with no issues.”

I will end there.

Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Leduc—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to the hon. parliamentary secretary's speech. At one point she did ask what we would cut. Let me be very clear, because she also referenced my home province of Alberta in kind of a flippant way.

The first things we would cut would be Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which have made it impossible to compete in the global environment where, believe it or not, oil coming to Canada from Algeria, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia faces fewer restrictions and less rigorous regulation around reporting than oil coming from Alberta being sold in our own country. Bill C-69 and Bill C-48 are where we would start cutting.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, before I start, I wanted to say that I am going to split my time with my good friend from Oxford, who is literally always behind my back or on my back, but he is a good guy. All jokes aside, I will begin my speech.

We are here today to speak about one of the most expensive economic updates, outside of COVID, in Canadian history. It was more of an update, not a mini-budget, as we saw, and the Prime Minister ran over and over again on the promise that it would not be more of the same. He promised that he would be different from other Liberals or the ones before him, even though he was the one advising them. He was right. He is not the same; he is even worse.

Ever since he became Prime Minister, Canadians' lives have gotten more expensive and more unsafe than they have ever been before. The Prime Minister ran on saying that he would be more prudent and more disciplined when it comes to spending, but he took the gold medal with his first budget for the most expensive and biggest deficit outside of COVID in Canadian history. Then he dropped this update in the spring economic statement, and he gave himself a silver medal for the second-biggest deficit in Canadian history outside of COVID. Canadians' lives got worse.

He said that he would bring back affordability and that he was going to be the guy who could do it. He also said that he could deal with President Donald Trump. Like every other Liberal before him, none of those promises were kept and they will never be kept. In fact, he is the same old costly, broken promises Liberal. This is the same Prime Minister who stood up in the House and said that affordability is the best it has been in a decade. This is the same guy who raised the cost of living by implementing and making sure to keep the industrial carbon tax, which will go up. Under him, food price inflation keeps going up. The cost of food is impossible for people to afford today, which is what leads to 2.2 million Canadians going to a food bank in a single month. Instead of reducing the food bank lines, he increased them. Instead of reducing the cost of food, he increased it.

Liberal taxes and Liberal deficits are what they do and what they have done over the last 11 years. There is no hope in sight that these are going to get any better because they are obsessed with the carbon tax. First, it was the consumer carbon tax that they were obsessed with and now we have the industrial carbon tax and the other carbon tax, which they call the clean fuel standard. All these taxes have made life more and more expensive for Canadians.

The finance minister said that he was going to haul in all the grocery store CEOs back in 2023 and that he was going to tell them what was on his mind and make sure that food prices came down by Thanksgiving 2023. We are heading toward Thanksgiving 2026, and food prices, taxes, costs, the debt and deficits have only gone up. Everything is put on the national credit card, which is why we call it the credit card budget. It is very costly to Canadians because they are the ones who have to foot the bill.

Everyone can remember back in the day when we had a responsible, disciplined Conservative government. Canadians could go to the grocery store and could have one income earner in the home. They could afford groceries and housing. They could get a week's worth of groceries for around $100 to $150, which today in the grocery store does not go very far.

Not only have the Liberals driven out $1 trillion of investment, but they have made it impossible for anyone to invest in Canada, which is why we do not see much competition here. They have put up so much red tape and so many barriers that companies do not want to come here. We all know that in a good free market, competition is a good thing; it drives down the cost of goods. With high Liberal taxes and the high burden of red tape and bureaucracy, companies do not want to invest here, which is why $1 trillion of good Canadian investment, including jobs and everything else, went to the U.S. It is easier to invest there and there is a rate of return that people can see. There is profit there.

This finance minister said he would bring down the cost of food. Absolutely nothing has gone down in cost. In fact, things have only gotten more and more expensive for Canadians. Canada's Food Price Report states that prices are expected to rise 4% to 6%. An average Canadian family of four will pay $17,000 for groceries this year, which is $1,000 more than they paid last year. This is what Liberal taxes do to Canadians and to the goods that we buy.

TD Economics states that grocery prices are over 30% higher than in 2019. In 2025, 9.8 million people lived in food-insecure households and those households included 2.4 million children. This is the highest in Canadian history. This is what high Liberal taxes do. This is what out-of-control deficits do and what debt does to Canadians because they have to foot the bill. It gives them less because when the Liberals increase housing costs and when they increase the cost of everything else, they raise taxes. Now, an average family pays more in taxes than it does in food, shelter and clothing combined. Those are necessities and Canadians have to pay more taxes now because of the current Liberal government. There is no end in sight. As I said before, this update would give the second-highest deficit in Canadian history outside of COVID. It is nothing to brag about. There is no good news in there for Canadians.

We proposed solutions. The finance minister recently said on TV that the Liberals have done enough for Canadians regarding affordability, and he is absolutely wrong. They could have done more. When these guys took 10¢ off in the excise tax on fuel, we said, “That is not far enough.” We proposed to take off 25¢. That would be taking off the GST and taking off the carbon tax, which the Liberals call the clean fuel standard. That would have saved Canadians 25¢ per litre, or $1,200 just this year. That would be real savings as opposed to the Liberals' cut, which is not even $100 of savings for an average family. Now, when summer is about to come, these savings would be realized. People could use that money. They could put their kids into sports. They could put savings away. However, the Liberals will never go far enough to help Canadians. They do just a bit and then they brag about it and say that people should be grateful for it. They could have done a lot more.

While I am on this topic, it is important for us to address what else we could have done. The Liberals could have gotten rid of their “no new pipelines“ bill, Bill C-69. They could have gotten rid of the tanker ban, Bill C-48. They could have gotten rid of the industrial carbon tax. This not only would help get more built here, with jobs in the economy. It would actually help unity in this country. People are more divided than ever under these Liberals today.

We want nothing more on this side than to have unity in this country once again. The Liberals have done the best job they could to separate people by every single demographic possible, whether by regions, industries or skin colour. That is what these Liberals are known for. They like to keep people divided so that they do not get together and they do not vote against them. However, the Conservatives will always have solutions.

Regarding this sovereign wealth fund that the Liberals would create, wealth funds are created with wealth. They are created with assets. They are created with surpluses or with resource revenues. However, these guys decided to do it with debt. Who is going to be responsible for all that? Once again, it is going to be Canadian taxpayers.

We need to end this ridiculousness. We need to get rid of these antidevelopment laws. We need to make sure we start developing here at home so that we are strong here and strong abroad. We need to make sure we bring Canadians together, not tear them apart. This economic update would do none of that. It would keep people divided more than ever. It would make people poorer. It would make taxes go up. It would make costs go up. It would make the debt go up. That would do nothing for Canadians. We would do the exact opposite to bring this country together and give back the affordability and the safety that Canadians deserve in this country once again.