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.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, although this is not my first intervention in this Parliament, this is the first opportunity I have had to take a moment to thank the voters of Calgary Crowfoot. I am getting used to the riding name change. Many riding names have changed, but I thank the voters of Calgary Crowfoot for sending me to this place for the fourth time in nine and a half years.

I want to thank my opponents in the election for putting their names forward. Without choice and without options for people to vote for, there is no democracy, so I thank all participants in this election.

I would like to thank the volunteers in Calgary Crowfoot, the amazing group of volunteers who helped us get out to 25,000-odd doors, put up thousands of signs and make an argument to voters for a change of government.

I would also like to thank, of course, my loving family: my wife Kim, my daughters Katie, Jessica and Meaghan, and my mum Marnie Kelly. My father Duane Kelly passed away, sadly, only a few months before the election.

I would like to congratulate all members of Parliament on their election, in particular the new MPs. There are many new MPs in this Parliament, and I look forward to meeting them and getting to know who everybody is.

I also congratulate the new cabinet and the new Prime Minister. They have tremendous work to do. It is important to me as a Canadian and to the people who sent me here that Canada prospers and does well and that we have competent, prudent and proper public administration and stewardship of public resources. I wish the government the best in doing so.

I will also say that I am part of a government in waiting, and we are ready to step up and form a government should this government fall. We will demand accountability. We will demand competence and execution. We will be here to scrutinize the laws the Liberals propose and the administration of the government in general. That is what we are here to do. That is what all members of Parliament do. Members do not even need to be in the opposition benches to do that. I challenge the backbenches on the government side to do their jobs as legislators and demand accountability from the government and their own party. That is their job. It is not just their job to cheerlead for the front bench. I hope they will take seriously their role in holding the government to account, as all parliamentarians should.

Here we are in June 2025, and the same government has been in power for nine and a half years. It has added half a trillion dollars to the national debt and brought in a structural deficit. It has no plan for a balanced budget in sight. We are enduring a housing crisis wherein mortgage payments and rent have more than doubled on its watch. We have seen a sense of hopelessness creep in among younger people, who believe that they will never have a path to home ownership other than through inheritance or the sharing of real estate equity from their family. Crime in every category has gone up. We have a drug overdose crisis.

As for the military, the most basic core function of government is national security and protecting Canadians, and tanks are in extremely short supply and falling apart. We have ships rusting out and jets wearing out, with recruitment, retention and housing in crisis. We have gaps in domain awareness in the Arctic and a RADARSAT system that is going to reach its end of life without a replacement. Procurement is in a state of disaster. We cannot even procure, build and supply basics like artillery shells. The recently retired chief of the defence staff has said that there has not been an acute need for military preparedness since the end of the Second World War and we are not there.

We have the threat of Trump to deal with, and the tariffs and all that his administration has said it may do. However, perhaps the most important statistic that I can point to is the per-capita GDP in Canada. Over the last 10 years, its growth was the lowest in the OECD. In fact, it was not growth at all. Canadians are no better off now than they were 10 years ago. This is a lost Liberal decade.

Where were we 10 years ago? When the Liberal government came to power, it inherited a balanced budget, affordable homes that working people could buy, a northern gateway pipeline that was conditionally approved and a Trans Mountain pipeline that was going to be built with private money, not with taxpayers' money. The energy east project was ready to be proposed. The F-35 were ready for contract and ready to be procured. Crime was at the lowest on record. This was the Canada that the government came into power with, and this is where we have been taken over the last 10 years.

It is not something that just randomly happened. There were concrete actions by the government all the way along that brought us here. They brought in the culture of “no”. They brought in new regulations and laws, like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, that make it impossible to get energy infrastructure projects built. That was by design. This was not even just a mistake on the part of the government.

Furthermore, there is no end in sight. The Liberals have brought in, and we have seen it creeping in, a culture of corporate welfare where connected insiders benefit and where Liberal insiders benefit. We saw over that time period the Liberals cancel the F-35s. They came in and said that they were not going to procure them at all and that they were going to have a separate procurement process. They dithered and wasted time while our need for this aircraft carried on. We would already have the F-35s if they had simply procured them when they took office. These are the things that have happened over the last 10 years.

The Speech from the Throne contains no concrete plan. There is no budget that would signal a plan or even tell Canadians and be honest about where we are financially, what our fiscal plan is and what the deficit will be. The Liberals have said some things that are encouraging to many. They have taken many ideas from the Conservative benches and the Conservative campaign. If someone puts a tax cut in front of me, I will vote for it. If someone proposes to eliminate a regulation that is destroying the job opportunities in my riding, I will support it. However, what I will not support is a Speech from the Throne that gives vague promises without any type of a clear road map, while the Liberals simultaneously table a set of estimates that show ballooning public expenditures for consultants, of all things. This is all while the Liberals have allowed the public service to grow enormously during their time while service to Canadians declines.

Copying our ideas is the most sincere form of flattery, and we would be prepared to accept it as Conservatives, but the government is not a new government. It has a different Prime Minister, but it has the same people in the front benches, who, for the last 10 years, have criticized Conservatives. When I look at Hansard, I can see some of the things that members of the front benches said to me and other members when we proposed important ideas, like axing the tax, which is something they were all too quick to adopt in the election. As such, I have doubts about the ability of the government, with the same group of people in the front benches, to execute on improving life for Canadians.

Natural Resources

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is the Liberal government's anti-energy policies that are blocking critical energy projects in this country. Bill C-69, the no new pipelines law; Bill C-48, the shipping ban; the job-killing oil and gas cap; and the industrial carbon tax are all driving away investment and killing Canadian energy development.

If the Prime Minister is serious about his so-called “build, baby, build”, will the Liberal government repeal its anti-energy agenda to get vital energy projects built?

Canadian Energy Sector

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to talk out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to Canadian energy. He says he wants Canada to be an energy superpower, but then says it can only be done with national consensus. He says he wants to green-light projects, but then presents an approval process of a minimum of two years. He says he wants provinces to present a list of ready-to-go projects, but then he came out of yesterday's meeting with no list. How sad is it that the premiers were just happy to meet with an adult after 10 years of the last guy, but he is no more serious when it comes to taking the necessary steps to unleash our energy sector?

If the Prime Minister is really committed to national unity and wants to make us the economic engine of the G7, he should start with repealing a decade of anti-energy laws Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, the production cap and the industrial carbon tax. He needs to get rid of them.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Madam Speaker, as this is my first time rising to speak in the 45th Parliament, I want to begin by expressing my deep gratitude to the constituents of the newly redistributed riding of Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake. I thank them for placing their trust in me to be their voice in this chamber.

It is truly an honour and a privilege to stand in this place, and I do so with a sense of deep responsibility, one that I do not take lightly. Of course, none of this would have been possible without the support of my family, volunteers and the many dedicated individuals who believe in our vision for a stronger Canada. I want to take a moment to thank them for standing with me. I want to especially thank my husband Adam and my children, Annabelle, William, Victoria and Eloise, for their unconditional love and their unconditional support. I also want to express my steadfast commitment to fighting for the change and hope needed to address the immediate challenges facing our country and to strengthen it for the next generation.

During the recent election, as I spoke with constituents, I heard the same concerns time and time again. The rising cost of living is making it harder for families to make ends meet, and many no longer feel safe in their own communities. While the issue of protecting our sovereignty was at the forefront of political discourse, the overwhelming concern I heard from constituents was about protecting the livelihoods and values that define our communities.

For a decade, the Liberal government has attacked the industries that form the backbone of our economy. The government has also threatened the values and way of life in Saskatchewan. My constituents want to know how we can chart a path forward that ensures our province has every opportunity to succeed. To unite our country and create an environment where every Canadian, regardless of where they live, can work hard and succeed requires a plan. Unfortunately, the only thing that the Liberal government's throne speech makes clear is that it does not have a plan.

While there are some lofty ideas in this speech, there are no details on how the Liberals will accomplish these goals and no specifics to give Canadians the confidence they need in the government's direction. A budget would provide that direction, but right out of the gate, the finance minister announced that the government would not be presenting a budget this year. Rightly, that declaration was met with immense blowback and criticism, not just from Conservatives, but from Canadians, political pundits and people from all sides of the political spectrum. After all that backlash, the government has backtracked just a little, promising a fall budget. However, a fall budget is simply not good enough. Serious leadership requires a plan and a plan that should be presented this spring.

The Prime Minister himself repeatedly said throughout the election that a “plan beats no plan”, yet here we are left wondering where that supposed plan is today. The throne speech offers nothing but vague rhetoric and lofty promises. It talks about wanting to bring down housing costs, which is a very important priority for many Canadians, especially young Canadians who have lost the dream of home ownership. However, instead of presenting a plan to cut the red tape that is driving up the cost of homes, the Liberal throne speech proposes a brand new bureaucracy. We need solutions that make housing more affordable, not more layers of red tape.

This lack of direction might stem from the very fact that the Prime Minister appointed a housing minister who has already publicly stated that, no, housing prices do not need to come down. How can Canadians trust the government to address the housing crisis when even its own minister does not believe in bringing prices down?

The Prime Minister also says that he wants to get big projects built, but his own ministers do not seem to agree. He has appointed many former Trudeau ministers who have actively worked to put up barriers and red tape, making it impossible to get big nation-building projects off the ground.

The lack of sincerity in wanting to get projects built is further evidenced by the Prime Minister's refusal to repeal the very laws that are stopping these projects, laws like Bill C-69, Bill C-48, the energy cap and the industrial carbon tax. These policies are suffocating our economy and job creation.

In fact, there is no direct mention of Canada's oil and gas sector in the throne speech, one of Canada's most important industries and the lifeblood of entire provinces. There is no mention of how we can get our energy to new markets and there is certainly no mention of how Canadian energy can displace our dependency on foreign oil from countries with lower environmental and human rights standards. There is no mention of how Canadian energy can help reduce our global energy dependence on those same countries.

This glaring omission in the throne speech speaks volumes about the government's priorities. It is not the bold leadership needed when our sovereignty and our economy are under attack. When outside forces are threatening our industries, we need a federal government that strengthens and protects them, not one that weakens and continues to undermine them.

Despite the talk of spending restraint, the throne speech offers no real numbers, no specific targets and certainly no credibility, especially after a decade of inflationary waste and economic decline. The tabling of the main estimates last week paints a distinctly different picture from the promise of spending restraint that was made in the throne speech. The Liberal government has tabled $486 billion in spending, and yet again, it has done this without the presentation of a budget. This is the first time in decades that this has been done, outside of the pandemic. This is not the change that Canadians wanted. This is a troubling continuation of the pattern we saw under Justin Trudeau: escalating spending with no clear plan on how the money will be spent efficiently or effectively.

The proposal would increase government spending by 8%, with much of that increase funnelled into bureaucracy, consultants and contractors, none of which will directly benefit Canadians who are struggling to make ends meet. The bureaucracy is set to grow by 6%, which is more than double the combined rate of inflation and population growth. What is worse is that spending on consultants is set to increase by 37%, reaching an astonishing $26 billion annually. This means that the average Canadian family will now be paying an extra $1,400 a year just to fund these consultants. In just this short time, the Prime Minister is proving to be even more expensive than Justin Trudeau, whom he advised.

At a time when Canadians are already faced with the highest inflation in decades, this reckless spending will only make life harder for everyday Canadians. The Liberals must stop burdening Canadians with debt and start implementing policies that make life more affordable. With no budget in sight and no clarity in the throne speech on how the government intends to tackle the challenges facing Canadians, it is clear that the repackaged Liberal government is not showing the leadership our country so desperately needs.

While the throne speech fails to offer the leadership Canadians need, Conservatives remain committed to holding the government to account and bringing about changes that will make this country more affordable, safer and self-reliant. We must work together to deliver the hope that Canadians are so desperate for. The Conservatives are committed to fighting for those priorities so that together, we can build a stronger Canada where all Canadians can get ahead and contribute to the success of our great country.

Oil and Gas Industry

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot of rhetoric from the Liberal government about making Canada an energy superpower, but its commitment to job-killing anti-Canadian energy legislation holds back our potential as a nation. The actions needed today are to repeal the no new pipeline bill, Bill C-69; repeal the shipping ban bill, Bill C-48; repeal the job-killing oil and gas production cap; and repeal the industrial carbon tax.

Will the Liberal government take action today, the action needed, to repeal its anti-energy agenda?

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister may be meeting, but he sure is not listening. While he dawdles, the opportunities to unleash Canadian energy pass us by because of the Liberals' anti-energy legislation, which blocks infrastructure and blocks investment. The provinces want to build and Canadian workers want to work. Canadians want energy independence, but Bill C-69 blocks pipelines and Bill C-48 blocks shipping. The job-killing carbon tax and the industrial carbon tax are punishing our energy sector.

Will the Prime Minister end his attacks on Canadian oil and gas and repeal his anti-energy legislation today?

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in this place and speak to the Speech from the Throne. As this is the first time I am rising in this Parliament, I would like to take a moment to express my gratitude to the voters in Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek for once again putting their faith in me to be their representative here in Ottawa. It is truly an honour, one that I take very seriously.

No one gets here on their own, and I want to thank my team and the volunteers who showed up day after day during the campaign. Lastly, I want to thank my husband, Milton, and my entire family, who have stood by me and behind me every step of the way.

I also want to acknowledge all those individuals displaced as a result of the fires in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, as well as all those fighting hard to ensure those communities remain safe.

The people in my riding and, indeed, Saskatchewan, overwhelmingly voted for hope and change. They understood that our country would not thrive under more of the same failed Liberal policies. While the Prime Minister promised change, a different Liberal government and a more serious approach, we are not off to a good start. As it turns out, things are not so different after all, starting with the Prime Minister naming Trudeau's foremost ministers to the most senior roles in his cabinet.

Immediately after their swearing-in, his ministers made statements refuting the various policies he had run on. For example, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture claimed that no pipelines will be built, and the housing minister stated that he intends to make sure housing prices do not come down. It is not a good sign that while Canadians are struggling with affordability and businesses face uncertainty, Liberal ministers want to suppress the country's largest industry and keep young Canadians priced out of the housing market.

Members will remember when the Prime Minister said during the election campaign, “a plan beats no plan.” Canadians were rightly expecting to see that plan put forward in the Speech from the Throne, followed by a budget. However, with the campaign behind him, the Prime Minister announced he is waiting until the fall, pushing off the plan, as well as the accountability that comes through the scrutiny of a government's budget. Instead we are left with a throne speech full of half measures, no budget and main estimates that include more spending than under Trudeau, with an 8% increase.

During the election, the Prime Minister said that despite being an economic adviser to Trudeau, he would be different; he would reorient the government to be more fiscally responsible. The throne speech stated, “In all of its actions, the Government will be guided by a new fiscal discipline: spend less so Canadians can [save] more.” However, no sooner did the promise of fiscal responsibility pass his lips than it is already being broken. Now we see that the spending of the Trudeau years will carry on under the current Prime Minister.

The main estimates were released last week, with the government asking to spend nearly half a trillion dollars in its first spending bill. How can the Liberals keep a straight face in claiming to be fiscally responsible while supporting a spending bill that even outstrips Trudeau’s spending from last year? Within this half-trillion dollar ask, the government has earmarked $26 billion in spending on consultants. That is an 11% increase in spending on those consultants.

In the last Parliament, Conservatives uncovered what the Liberals paid for: consultants who had padded their pockets through double-dipping, fraudulent billing and, at the end of it all, subpar work that could have been done in-house by the public service. Perhaps the additional billions in spending is due to the new list of Liberal insiders that the new Prime Minister brings with him from his previous career.

In the arrive scam scandal, a consulting firm billed tens of millions of dollars to build a simple app but did none of the work, work that some programmers were able to replicate over a weekend. Roughly $60 million is known to have been spent on this app; the number may be even higher, but, because shoddy documentation was kept, the Auditor General could not confirm it, so we will never know.

We also found out that McKinsey, a favourite consulting firm of the Liberals, was given preferential treatment, leading to $100 million in government contracts. The Liberals used a contract vehicle called a national master standing offer, which is usually reserved for vendors who offer a specialized service that government departments need access to. When the Auditor General reviewed these contracts, she found that McKinsey should not have been given special access to the government contracts.

In the throne speech, the Prime Minister also promised to work with indigenous peoples to identify and catalyze projects of national significance. Given the Liberal government's track record on indigenous procurement, I believe this will be another empty promise.

While studying the procurement strategy for indigenous businesses, the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates found that the government was not verifying the indigeneity of businesses. During testimony, indigenous groups and businesses suggested that most of the funding through this program was going to non-indigenous businesses that were posing as indigenous. The Liberals allowed this abuse by ignoring the rules and a lack of indigenous leadership and/or ownership while handing out millions of dollars in contracts. The government was unable to offer any explanation for its failure to ensure that programs meant to benefit indigenous peoples and businesses did so.

Although this study was cut short when the election was called, the issues persist and must be addressed, especially if the government intends to fast-track major projects across the country. This leads us to the promise in the speech to create a “new Major Federal Project Office”.

Imitation is truly the best form of flattery. In 2007, the Harper government created the Major Projects Management Office. The goal of the office at that time was to improve coordination within Canada's regulatory system by providing industry with a single, efficient point of entry into the federal process. It also provided for the integration of Crown consultation requirements with indigenous communities at the beginning of the process. This further demonstrated the Harper government's commitment to consulting with and listening to Canadians, especially those most directly affected by resource development projects, all while upholding Canada's world-class environmental standards. Does this sound familiar?

However, the last 10 years of an antidevelopment Liberal government has made Canada dependent on and vulnerable to the U.S. Without a commitment to scrap the production cap on Canadians, to repeal Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, and to axe the federal industrial carbon tax, this proposal is just another empty promise.

In closing, the promises made in the Speech from the Throne do not line up with Liberals' actions. While promising to enact more fiscal discipline, they are increasing spending. While promising to define a new relationship with the United States, they are dropping retaliatory tariffs and allowing the U.S. to take jobs out of Canada. While promising to make Canada an energy superpower, Liberal ministers insist that pipelines should not be built and that Canada's oil and gas should stay in the ground. While the Prime Minister promised to bring housing costs down, his housing minister intends to keep house prices up, at record highs.

The Liberals are already going back on their word within the first days of this session. Unfortunately for Canadians, the so-called new Liberal government looks a lot like the old one. After 10 years of high spending leading to inflation and an affordability crisis, Canadians want fiscal restraint and a government that will be responsible with their tax dollars.

Canadians can count on Conservatives to fulfill our duty every day to stand up for them, fight for change and restore hope once again.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say congratulations on your new role in the Speaker's chair. I know that is something you have been wanting to do for quite some time, and I am very confident that you will do very well in your new role.

As this is my first speech in the 45th Parliament, I would like to take a minute to thank the voters of Regina—Wascana for electing me for a third time to represent their interests here in the House of Commons. They have my solemn promise that I will do my very best to fulfill this role each and every day.

Of course, I would like to thank the many campaign volunteers who worked so tirelessly on the election campaign by knocking on doors, putting up lawn signs and giving people rides to the polls on election day.

Certainly, I would like to thank my family for supporting me throughout every step of this long journey, including all the way to Parliament Hill for my swearing-in ceremony last week.

Speaking of long journeys, it was certainly a pleasure to welcome King Charles to Ottawa for the Speech from the Throne. Given that this is a new Parliament and Canadians have said that they want politicians to work together, I will start by highlighting some of the positive things in the throne speech.

The income tax cut and the GST cut on new homes are initiatives that Conservatives have been calling for for quite some time. The Liberals did not go quite as far as we would have liked, but if they want to steal Conservative ideas, we are certainly not going to complain.

For the most part, while the King's speech contained many positive words, it was certainly lacking in details in terms of how its goals would be achieved. This is concerning, especially since Parliament has not sat since Christmas and will not sit again until the fall.

Nevertheless, there was one brief reference in the throne speech about making Canada “the world's leading energy superpower”. Given such a passing reference, I do not think the current government fully appreciates just how important the natural resource sector is to our future prosperity, especially for Saskatchewan. In any given year, between 10% and 15% of the provincial government's budget comes from natural resource royalties. That means that 10% to 15% of the budget of every hospital, school and provincial social service comes from getting Saskatchewan resources to market, and 10% to 15% of the salary of every doctor, nurse, teacher and social worker depends on the natural resource sector. However, if we cannot get Saskatchewan resources to market, if we cannot get oil, gas, potash and uranium to their customers, then it becomes that much more difficult to build hospitals and schools, and to hire more nurses and teachers. As a result, government services and quality of life deteriorate.

This raises an obvious question: What is the best way for a landlocked province like Saskatchewan to get its resources to markets, both in Canada and around the world? For oil and gas, the obvious answer is pipelines. We need to get pipelines built in order for the quality of life of Canadians to improve, so it is certainly concerning that the throne speech contained so little about developing our natural resource sector.

There was the mention of creating a new major federal project office, which one would hope would approve and speed up pipeline projects. Unfortunately, in his first question period on Wednesday, the Prime Minister refused to answer whether new pipelines would be approved. He left it to his Minister of Energy and Natural Resources to clarify: “we will support new pipelines if there is consensus in Canada for them.” The Prime Minister cannot even come to a consensus within his own cabinet about getting pipelines built, so how is he going to come to a consensus all across the country? I would suggest that as long as the former minister of the environment, the orange jumpsuit-wearing, CN Tower-climbing member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie, is still sitting around the cabinet table, new pipeline projects will never see the light of day in this country.

During the election campaign, when I was doing door-to-door canvassing in Regina—Wascana, just about every day someone on the doorstep shared with me a story about long waiting lists to see a medical specialist, long nights in a hospital waiting room just to see a doctor, overcrowded classrooms, and overworked and underpaid nurses and teachers. These are the direct results of a provincial budget stretched too thin, because for the past 10 years, the Liberal government has refused to let us build pipelines in this country.

However, the benefits of the resource sector to the Saskatchewan economy are not limited to provincial government coffers. Let us not forget about the actual workers who work in the mines and on the oil rigs. There used to be plenty of jobs in this sector so that people could earn a decent living and raise a family. Unfortunately, the resource sector in southern Saskatchewan has shed thousands of jobs over the last 10 years because of the policies of the Liberal government to keep resources in the ground.

Let us not forget one of Regina's largest employers, Evraz North America, which makes pipelines. The members of United Steelworkers 5890, the union that represents Evraz employees, used to have stable, predictable employment as long as pipelines were being built and as long as there were new pipeline projects on the horizon. However, they too have suffered from hundreds of layoffs because of the Liberal government's opposition to pipelines. Many other people in Regina directly benefit from the development of the natural resource sector, including the numerous oil and gas service companies and, of course, the workers at Regina's co-op refinery.

In order to get more pipelines built, the Liberals must repeal Bill C-69, the “no more pipelines” law. This law, which was passed by the Liberals in 2019, has made it impossible for the private sector to build pipelines in this country. Once Bill C-69 is finally repealed and we can once again build pipelines across Canadian soil, the next step is to ship Canadian oil and gas across the ocean to other countries. This means the Liberals must also repeal Bill C-48, the west coast oil tanker ban. Take, for example, the northern gateway pipeline project. This pipeline, which was applied for and approved under the previous Conservative government, would have piped Canadian oil and gas to the coast of northern B.C. and then on to customers in Asia. Unfortunately, this pipeline project was stopped dead in its tracks when the Liberals announced that they would not allow oil tankers to transport the oil from the end of the pipeline to customers in Asia and around the world.

The Liberal government can no longer overlook the contributions that our natural resource sector can make to international trade and to international peace and security. Our allies should not be buying oil and gas from dictators in Russia or the Middle East. They should be buying from Canada. This is exactly what has been asked of Canada by the Japanese Prime Minister, the German Chancellor, the Greek Prime Minister and many other countries as well.

The House is scheduled to rise for the summer break on June 20. That means that, due to the Liberals' decision to prorogue Parliament and then call an early election, when the House returns in the fall, we will have sat for only 20 days since Christmas. Twenty days is apparently not enough time for the Liberals to table a budget, so I am not going to get my hopes up too high that they will enact legislation to repeal Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, or to fix the many other problems they have created over the last 10 years. If the Liberals do want to work together and steal even more Conservative ideas, especially ones related to pipelines and the natural resource sector, we are happy to co-operate.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is with humility, pride and a profound sense of responsibility that I rise in the House as the member of Parliament for Nanaimo—Ladysmith. Let me begin by offering my heartfelt thanks to the people of my community. I thank them for placing their trust in me. From the shores of Saltair to Ladysmith harbour; from the vibrant arts communities on Gabe to the farms of Yellow Point, Cedar and Cassidy; and from the businesses of downtown Nanaimo to the heights of Mount Benson, I am deeply honoured to represent them. I will work every day to earn their trust, to re-earn it and to serve the people of Nanaimo—Ladysmith.

I thank my family: my husband, Martin; our daughter, Sam; son, Joel; bonus daughter, Amara; my mother, Fran; my sisters; my in-laws and their families; my dad, Jules, whom I miss greatly; and everyone who stood by me through this journey. Public life is demanding, and I would not be standing here without their support, dedication and sacrifice.

I thank our incredible volunteers, and especially Kyle, who built more than a campaign; he built a community, one where everyone is welcome, where ideas are exchanged respectfully and where people are free to be their authentic self. I look forward to expanding our community to include everyone in Nanaimo—Ladysmith who wants to be part of this incredible journey.

The people of Nanaimo—Ladysmith voted for change and hope. They sent a Conservative to the House because they are tired of promises without performance, announcements without action and spending without results. They are counting on those of us who have been sent to the House, all of us, to work together to make real progress on the issues that matter to our communities.

Like many members of the House, I had a career before running for office. As a lawyer, I helped clients navigate complex legal systems that are too slow and too bogged down in red tape, paperwork and jargon. As a goldsmith, I learned that patience, precision and attention to detail are essential. As a business owner, I learned that budgets never balance themselves. Those experiences taught me that quality matters, that what one builds must stand the test of time, that it is a privilege and an honour to be part of people's lives and that even the smallest mistakes can have real consequences. I bring those lessons with me to the House.

Nanaimo—Ladysmith is one of the most breathtaking and diverse ridings in this country: coastal and forested, urban and rural, stretching from mountains to sea. It is home to indigenous communities like the Snuneymuxw and Stz'uminus first nations people, who live and work alongside the descendants of coal miners, fishers, trades workers, foresters, small business owners and new Canadians.

However, beneath that natural beauty, there is despair. It is a despair that is as real and as deep as the coal mines that used to dot our landscape. The addiction crisis continues to devastate communities like mine. In 2024, Nanaimo lost 94 people to overdoses, more than three times the number lost in 2016, when B.C. first declared the opioid crisis a public emergency. Already I have sat with grieving parents who have had to bury children, spoken with first responders who are stretched to the limit and door-knocked in neighbourhoods in my community where despair has become the daily norm.

The people of Nanaimo—Ladysmith are compassionate. We care deeply about our neighbours, but our patience is running thin. We want real treatment, real recovery and real results.

As a lawyer, I have seen what happens when the system prioritizes bureaucracy over justice. As a legislator, I intend to help fix it. As a Conservative, I believe that the government should do fewer things but do them well. That starts with getting our fiscal house in order so we can have the resources to help those who need it.

The cost of living is truly out of control. Seniors are cutting back on essentials, splitting pills and skipping meals. Families are working harder than ever but falling further behind. For many young people and a lot of people who are not so young, the dream of home ownership feels like a wall they can never scale. After a decade of overspending, Canadians are sick of paying more and getting less. Inflation is eating into paycheques in a way that just cannot be fixed with a modest tax cut spaced over a couple of years.

Mortgage payments are crushing young families now. Groceries are unaffordable now. Tariffs are threatening our jobs and businesses now. Canadians cannot wait for relief until next fall or next spring. Canadians need relief now.

We also need bold action on housing. In Nanaimo, I have met single parents forced into unsafe living conditions just to keep a roof over their head. In Ladysmith, families are being priced out of the very communities they helped build. We do not have enough homes, and the answer is not buzzwords; it is builders. It is not another department, agency or czar; it is more shovels in the ground, in the hands of workers earning good wages to support their families. We must slash red tape, eliminate delays and confront any ideology that stands in the way of building. We must invest in skilled trades, in the very people whose hands will build the future.

Recently I had the pleasure of watching culinary arts students at Vancouver Island University reclaim the record for the world's largest Nanaimo bar. Yes, I did get to sample it, and yes, it was delicious, but even that sweet moment was overshadowed by the bitter reality of financial distress, in part due to the federal government's disastrous and abrupt changes in immigration policies. VIU was already staring down a deficit that caused it to cancel all its music programs and end its relationship with Elder College.

Now VIU has no choice, as a result of the government's immigration about-face, but to propose suspending six additional programs and cancelling 13 others entirely, including the dental assistant programs that I would have thought necessary to deliver dental care, the master of community planning program that is needed to build the houses the government claims it wants, and the graduate diploma in hospitality management that is vital to our tourism industry.

VIU is an economic anchor of Nanaimo—Ladysmith as well as a cherished community institution. What VIU needs, what we all need, is clear, predictable immigration policy and better coordination across governments, universities and industries.

Canada must also reclaim its economic independence. Conservatives will stand proudly for Canadian energy and the jobs and prosperity those industries create, particularly in communities like Nanaimo—Ladysmith, where over 20% of the workforce is dependent on the natural resource sector and trades.

We call on the government to repeal job-killing laws like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48. We need to build pipelines and other transportation infrastructure to unleash our resources and create good-paying jobs, not for special interest lobbyists in Ottawa, but for workers in communities across this great country.

Parliament has much work to do, but we face some pretty simple choices: more bureaucracy or more building, more taxes or more paycheques, more excuses or more action. The people of Nanaimo—Ladysmith have made their choice. They want change. They want lower costs, more homes, safer streets and real economic growth.

To my colleagues, including my colleagues across the aisle, let us—

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, now that Their Majesties have left the national capital region, we can really pick apart the throne speech the government wrote yesterday.

Yesterday Canadians heard a throne speech that was not bad on slogans and rhetoric but terrible on any kind of detail and a plan. A lot of times, government members will defend that by saying that the details come out in the legislation. While there may be some truth to that, in a throne speech, we usually at least get a clear indication of what that legislation would do. In other words, we get an indication of the way the government is going to accomplish the goals it has set out for itself. We received precisely none of that yesterday.

We were told that the government wants to build more homes, yet all the government did was talk about increasing the number of bureaucrats who run programs in Ottawa. There was nothing about incentivizing municipalities to speed up development processes and lower development charges. The government copied and pasted many aspects of the Conservative platform; one specific aspect was eliminating the GST on new home construction. Some might call it plagiarism, which is something the Prime Minister has some familiarity with.

The Liberals must have dropped something when they were cutting and pasting that from the Conservative platform, because they accidentally restricted it. I say “accidentally” sarcastically. They made this policy much narrower in its application. Our plan would have reduced the GST on new homes, period, but the Liberals have restricted that to only some new home purchases. They did not talk at all about the way they were going to reduce that red tape and lower those taxes.

We have a Prime Minister who wrote a book called Value(s), in which he defined himself as a human being. In that book, not only did he profess his love for the carbon tax, but he also bragged about the experience he has imposing higher costs, not just on Canadians but on the people of the world.

That is where the Prime Minister comes from: a global investment scheme in which fancy bankers and powerful elites put together a grift. The Prime Minister actually explained how he benefited from this. He gave an interview when he was on a panel and described how this grift unfolds. First, he and people like him have access to important decision-makers and policy-makers around the world. He actually said this. He uses that access to lobby for regulatory changes.

In other words, the Prime Minister gets to have a glass of wine or a canapé with a government official in a country. In those conversations or meetings, he convinces them to make regulatory changes, and then he invests in the companies that benefit from those changes.

In the example the Prime Minister used, he spoke about lobbying the government of the United Kingdom to bring in a new requirement for jet fuel. There was no market for the new requirement. If there was a natural market for it, then aviation companies would make those changes to jet fuel. The Prime Minister specifically required that a certain percentage of that aviation fuel had to be sourced from nonconventional energy. If there was a market for that, if that nonconventional product was more efficient or cheaper, then the companies would do it themselves. They would not need a regulatory agency to tell them to do it. There was no market for it. Why is that? It would increase costs. Those costs would get passed on to consumers, and fewer people would be able to afford to fly.

Therefore, the Prime Minister convinces the policy-maker to bring in a rule that cannot be ignored. In the absence of a market demanding it or necessitating it, the awesome power of the government comes in and forces aviation companies to blend in a certain percentage of nonconventional energy to use in their fuel. Those extra costs get passed on to passengers, and fewer people are able to afford those tickets.

The Prime Minister convinces the policy-maker that every plane flying in and out of a U.K. airport must have a certain percentage of fuel. Then he looks around and sees a company producing a nonconventional energy product. It was not making any money before the regulatory change; now it has a huge market for what it produces, that nonconventional energy product. All of a sudden, with a massive market, that company will be able to sell what it makes to all kinds of airlines flying in and out of the United Kingdom. What does the Prime Minister do? He invests in that company.

Not only does the Prime Minister lobby for the regulatory change, but he then also invests in the company and makes millions. Members do not have to take my word for it. The Prime Minister himself admitted this before he ran to be the leader of the Liberal Party.

Mr. Speaker, imagine doing that with any other aspect of government. Imagine having a buddy who owns an asphalt company, and for one reason or another, it was not making much money. Maybe the company was selling an additive for the asphalt, but there was not really a market for it; cities and rural municipalities did not think they needed to buy it, and the company did not produce anything of value for motorists or taxpayers in that area.

Mr. Speaker, imagine using special access to get time with ministers or government officials and, not because there was a market for it, convincing them to pass a rule that the company's product had to be included in all the asphalt being laid down in an area and then going out and investing in that company. If someone were an elected official and they did that, they would likely be up on criminal charges. They would likely be investigated for corruption. That is exactly what the Prime Minister did in his private sector career: He used his access with government officials to lobby for changes to allow him to make investments and make millions. That is who the Prime Minister is.

In the throne speech, there was no mention of how to get big projects built. We can remember it was the Liberal government that cancelled big energy projects like northern gateway and energy east. Northern gateway would have opened up Asian markets; it is the shortest route between where the oil and gas is found in the ground and where there is a deep water port to be able to ship it to countries like India, China and Japan, with booming populations and an ever-increasing middle class. Right now, many of those countries are buying their energy from countries that do not share our values. These are countries with dictators and regimes that abuse the rights of women and religious minorities and that engage in fomenting wars and terrorist activities not just throughout the region but throughout the world. Canadians are no longer able to fill those markets, because the Liberals cancelled those pipelines. There was nothing in the throne speech about repealing those terrible pieces of legislation or supporting those projects.

The Prime Minister says that he is the man with the plan. Slogans are not as efficient as plans, yet there is no plan. Then he goes around and tells Canadians that there will not even be a budget for six months. We can look at all the economic calamities that Canadians have had to suffer through: an inflation crisis, a cost of living crisis, a housing crisis, massive debt and deficits racked up by Liberal governments. The Liberal government is spending more on servicing the debt than it is on health care. In other words, it is paying more in interest payments to bankers and bondholders.

After all of this, with the Prime Minister himself saying that speed was of the essence and that, as a country, we have to start addressing this as quickly as possible, he is telling Canadians they are going to have to wait for six months before we get this plan. I do not know of a single boardroom around the country that would keep a CEO in his position if, in the middle of a crisis, the CEO came in and said, “I know we are in a crisis. Do not worry; I have a plan. I will come back to you in six months.” I do not think any board of directors would keep a CEO who asked for a six-month grace period to start to address a problem.

The Prime Minister says he wants to build, but he refuses to repeal the very laws that stop us from building. He will not commit to repealing Bill C-69, the anti-pipeline bill. He refuses to repeal Bill C-48, the shipping ban that blocks western Canadian oil from reaching global markets. He is keeping in the energy and production caps and the industrial carbon tax. Here we have a situation in which our steelworkers, aluminum workers and manufacturers in Canada have to worry about their companies competing against American manufacturers when there is no carbon tax on the U.S. side of the border. My colleague from Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore made a great point yesterday when she pointed out that saying we are going to fight with the Americans while keeping an industrial carbon tax on Canadian workers is like tying one elbow behind our back. It is not going to put Canada in a position of strength if the government keeps the industrial carbon tax.

The Prime Minister flippantly said, “When was the last time you bought a whole bunch of steel?” Does he not realize that there is steel in a lot of things that Canadians buy on a pretty regular basis?

Last time I opened my fridge, the fridge had steel; the car I drive has steel; lots of household components have steel; and lots of framing materials for new homes require steel. There are many things that Canadians have to buy on a regular basis that contain steel. That steel could be made in Canada, and we could export some of that steel to the U.S. and around the world if Canadian manufacturers had an advantage and did not have to pay that carbon tax. The irrational devotion to the carbon tax that the Prime Minister has in keeping the industrial side of it is a direct repudiation of anything he has said on helping Canada fight back from a position of strength. He is going to saddle us with higher taxes and higher regulatory regimes.

There is no mention of repealing the soft-on-crime laws, Bill C-75 and Bill C-5, which unleashed a wave of crime across the country. Those two bills drastically lowered penalties for dangerous and repeat offenders, which caused the crime wave. Crime is not like the weather; it is not like one day there might be a bit of humidity and the next day there might be a few extra car thefts. Crime is a direct result of justice policies. When the Liberal Party came in and started repealing mandatory minimum sentences and forcing judges to grant bail instead of jail for some of the country's most notorious and dangerous offenders, we saw a direct correlation in the rise in crime.

The same thing happened with the drug crisis. We had a government that decided to take taxpayers' money. We can think of the taxpayer working so hard, picking up extra shifts, working long hours, missing out on time with their children and their families, because they were hustling and striving to eke out a better quality of life, knowing that when those tax dollars came straight off their paycheque, a portion of those tax dollars was going to buy dangerous opioids to give out to people to use in communities and those drugs ended up in the hands of drug dealers. Imagine the insult to injury for those Canadians who are barely getting by, to find out that their tax dollars went to subsidize drug distribution in our communities.

These are simply the same old talking points dressed up in new packaging. The Liberals are trying to pull off a massive trick on Canadians. They are pretending that, if they just change their rhetoric a little bit and change the leader and the name, but keep the same ministers and keep the same policies, somehow Canadians will believe that things are actually different. However, changing superficial things is easy. The Liberals can swap out the talking points, and they can suddenly mimic some of the language they hear from other political parties, as they did when they lifted Conservative ideas. It is easy to wear black shoes and normal socks and pretend everything is going to be different. However, the things that actually affect Canadians' lives are not the superficial things. They are not words on pieces of paper. They are not the grand prose that comes from a monarch on a visit to the Senate to read a throne speech. Canadians' lives are changed by the laws, the tax rates and the regulations that governments set. So far, we have absolutely zero indication that there will be anything meaningfully changed under this Prime Minister.

There was absolutely nothing in the throne speech to talk about unleashing our businesses and our resources, but that is what Conservatives will do. The best way to fight back against a threat to our country is to fight back from a position of strength.

It is easy to use pretty words and make big speeches, but the reality is that Canadians' quality of life is changed only by the government's policies, not by speeches in either chamber. It is the bills and the decisions made by ministers that will truly change Canadians' quality of life. For now, there is no sign that the government is going to offer Canadians real change.

Our plan, which the Conservatives put forward to the Canadian people during the last election, will be what we fight for in this Parliament. We will build on the success our leader Pierre Poilievre had in achieving 42% of the vote, with millions of new Canadians voting for the Conservative Party.

I know my Conservative colleagues will agree with me on this. I guarantee that every single one of us, when we were knocking on doors in the last election, met people who told us that they had never voted Conservative before, any many of them said that they had never even voted before. They saw in our leader Pierre Poilievre's vision for this country something that they had not seen for a generation from the Liberals: hope that the promise of Canada could be restored, where hard work pays off, where we can earn a powerful paycheque that affords not just the basic necessities of life, but some of the nice extras as well, and the belief that every generation that comes after will be better off than the previous because our country continues to grow and improve upon itself.

That hope has been lost over the past 10 years because of Liberal government policies. While we have more work to do, as the Conservative Party, to win the next election, I can assure members that our leader Pierre Poilievre will continue to espouse that vision of hope and that promise to Canadians that life will get better.

In the meantime, we will hold the government to rigorous account. It is our job to go through, line by line, every dollar spent, every tax dollar taken out of the pockets of Canadians and every infringement on their liberty. With regard to any decision that comes from the government, we will do our job, not for ourselves, not because we are the blue team and they are the red team, but for Canadians who have to go to work every day and shoulder that government spending, pay off that government debt and put up with the terrible outcomes of disastrous policies that have hurt our country for so long.

More and more Canadians want a government that puts Canadian workers, Canadian energy and Canadian families first. That is what the Conservative opposition will be fighting for every single day, for as long as this Parliament lasts.

I will close with this thought. It was very disappointing, not just for parliamentarians but for Canadians themselves. There are a lot of economic headwinds that are not just on the horizon but are absolutely blowing through communities all across the country. TD Bank is predicting a recession just around the corner, with thousands of jobs lost. We heard from our housing shadow minister today about a phenomenon that only the Liberal Party of Canada could possibly create, where prices are so high that new buyers cannot afford to buy houses, but they are now lower than the inflated prices that the existing owners bought them at. We have a situation where sellers cannot afford to sell, because if they drop their prices any more, they will not be able to cover the mortgage that they owe, but prices are still far too high for buyers. Buyers cannot buy, and sellers cannot sell. Only a Liberal government could achieve such monumental failure.

We have a situation where the debt required to finance what the government has campaigned on will put enormous pressure on bond markets. We do not know where that will lead, but it has never, ever led to a good place when governments start borrowing so much money that lenders start to doubt whether the government will ever be able to fully pay it off and start demanding a higher premium for that.

We think of the man with the plan, the guy we hire in a crisis, the guy who claims that he can walk into a boardroom and solve these issues, but who still has not gotten results from his visit to the United States. Other countries have gotten deals. The Prime Minister has not gotten one.

There is still no plan to get new energy projects built. Worst of all, there is no budget to show Canadians just how bad the situation is and what they might be facing in the future. That lack of a budget is probably the most concerning thing that we have had heard from the government over the last few weeks. This is the number one job. The reason why the House of Commons exists is to approve taxation and spending. That is the origin story of our parliamentary system.

It is not just a matter of disrespect; it is a matter of hiding from Canadians the true consequences of government policies. The fact that the government will not commit to tabling a budget before it goes on vacation for the summer is telling. What it is telling me is that the Liberals are really afraid to share the bad news. They are afraid of coming clean with Canadians because the numbers are so bad.

The best thing we can do with tough medicine is to take it early, and then all of us can get together to try to fix the problem. We urge the government to table the budget.

In that light, I move:

That the motion be amended by adding the following: “and we urge Your Majesty's advisors to include a firm commitment to present to Parliament an economic update or budget this spring before the House adjourns for the summer that incorporates measures aimed at unleashing Canada's economic potential including full accountability of Canada's finances.”

Address in Reply

[Billy Morin, Conservative, Edmonton Northwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals put forward a plan that includes a section on Canadian unity but does not mention the west once. The Liberals offer empty words on making Canada an energy superpower but provide absolutely no concrete action to spur investment and growth in our energy sector. This is what the Prime Minister's energy minister offered in Calgary last week: empty words, void of tangible commitments.

Let us be clear: The job losses and cancelled projects in our energy sector are the direct result of Liberal laws and policies. Making Canada an energy superpower begins with repealing the Liberal anti-energy laws. We must repeal Bill C-69, the no new pipelines act, which blocks energy infrastructure; Bill C-48, the oil tanker ban, which landlocks our energy; and the oil and gas production cap, which will gut $20 billion from the Canadian economy and kill 54,000 jobs, many of them in my own riding.

The energy minister failed to do it, so here is the chance for the Prime Minister to unequivocally commit to undoing the Liberal anti-energy laws. Will the Prime Minister repeal the no new pipelines law, the oil tanker ban and the oil and gas production cap so that Canada can build energy infrastructure and get our resources to market?

Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition I am presenting comes from Canadians from across the country who want to recognize a particular hashtag that has been trending on Twitter saying that the Prime Minister must go. It has been a top-trending hashtag, and more than 500,000 people have retweeted it.

The petitioners have described their concerns around the Prime Minister, including his divisive comments and attitudes towards Canadians who have made different health decisions. They also note that the Prime Minister has passed laws, including Bill C-48 and Bill C-69, the no more pipelines bills, which cancelled many energy projects and drove away investment through their excessive regulations. Petitioners note that the Prime Minister has generated more debt than all previous Canadian governments combined.

Petitioners want the government to axe the tax, and they note that the carbon tax continues to drive up prices and punish Canadians who have to drive to work or to school or to get groceries. They also note the serious lack of ethics by the Prime Minister: the SNC-Lavalin scandal, the billionaire island scandal, the WE Charity scandal, the $6,000-a-night hotel scandal and the multi-million dollar arrive scam app. As well, the petitioners are concerned with the Prime Minister's inaction on foreign interference.

Therefore, the folks who have signed the petition call on the Prime Minister to resign from office and to call a carbon tax election.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1

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

Madam Speaker, I have said literally hundreds of times on the campaign trail that yes, Conservatives are opposed to Bill C-48, the west coast oil tanker ban. That is because Canada's oil and gas do not do anyone any good when they just sit there in the ground doing nothing.

Other countries around the world buy their oil and gas from Saudi Arabia and Russia. That is so counterproductive to building a productive Canadian society and a better place for our allies all around the world. Yes, we will certainly get oil and gas flowing to our allies and around the world.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Regina—Wascana mentioned the northern gateway pipeline.

What he did not mention was that the northern gateway pipeline and the plan by Enbridge to bring crude oil supertankers to the north coast of B.C. was wholly rejected by municipalities, first nations, anglers, commercial fishermen and the majority of the people of the District of Kitimat, who held a specific referendum on that issue. The culmination of that effort led to Bill C-48, the north coast Oil Tanker Moratorium Act.

I say this with no animus to my colleague personally, but his leader is going around the country saying that a Conservative government would tear up that oil tanker moratorium as one of its first acts in office.

Can my friend down the way confirm if that is true? Can he say it loud enough for the people all the way on the west coast of Canada, on Haida Gwaii, in Prince Rupert and Klemtu, and all of the—

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

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity tonight to speak to the budget.

A big part of what politicians do is decide which problems in society need to be solved by governments and which problems are best left to individuals and to families and to the private sector.

The Liberal government, with its NDP coalition partners, spends a great deal of time, effort, energy and taxpayers' money trying to solve all sorts of problems, while unfortunately accomplishing very little and more often than not being counterproductive.

I remember when the finance minister presented her budget last month. She received one partial standing ovation from the official opposition when she said:

There are those who claim that the only good thing government can do when it comes to economic growth is to get out of the way.

The finance minister went on to cite the example of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project as an example of her government's success when it comes to government intervention in the economy. It was not too long ago that resource companies and international investors were excited about all of the potential pipeline projects in this country, such as northern gateway, Keystone XL and energy east, just to name a few.

Building pipelines such as these is something that private sector companies are able to do in most countries, but sadly not in Canada. All of the blueprints for all of these pipeline projects have been sitting on the shelf collecting dust for years because the Liberal government has made it practically impossible for the private sector to get projects like this built through its anti-development legislation, such as Bill C-69, the “no more pipelines” bill, and Bill C-48, the “west coast oil tanker ban”.

It is sad that the finance minister would cite, as a success story, the one lonely, solitary pipeline expansion project that the government decided to take over while all the others were being chased away. It is also worth noting that this was not a new pipeline being built. It was simply the twinning of an existing pipeline, with a new pipe being laid right alongside the old one. This raises the question: How long did it take to build the new pipeline and how long did it take to build the old one?

The proposal for the original Trans Mountain pipeline was submitted for approval in 1951. Construction was finished in 1952. Compare that to the decade that it has taken for the expansion to be completed. That makes this project hardly anything for the Liberal government to brag about. One also cannot help but be concerned about the cost overruns that have happened under the Liberal government's watch. The Trans Mountain expansion was originally estimated to cost $7 billion. The final price came in at $34 billion.

When a fivefold increase in total cost is touted as a success story, that should give all Canadians pause the next time the Liberal government sets out on one of its interventions into the economy. The finance minister went on to talk about her government's new school lunch program. It seems that the Liberals have just recently discovered what Conservatives and food banks have been saying for years, namely that food bank use has skyrocketed under the Liberal government.

According to a report by Food Banks Canada, nearly two million Canadians had to use food banks in March of last year. That is a 32% increase from the year before. Furthermore, one third of food bank users are children. I did not hear the finance minister mention under whose watch food bank use skyrocketed. I did not hear anything in her speech about the Liberals increasing their carbon tax again this year on the farmers who grow the food, the truckers who truck the food and the grocers who refrigerate the food, and about all of those costs being passed on to consumers at the grocery store.

I also did not hear anything from the finance minister about passing Bill C-234 in its original form to exempt grain drying and barn heating from the carbon tax so that those costs are not passed on to consumers in the form of higher grocery prices.

I did not hear anything about the Liberals' $40-billion deficit driving up interest rates or the $60 billion in debt-servicing charges making it more difficult for Canadians to make ends meet and causing Canadians to have to choose between putting a roof over their heads or putting food onto the dinner tables.

Instead of focusing on the root cause of the cost of living crisis, the Liberals have decided to bring in yet another government program. This time, it is a nationwide school lunch program. While school lunch programs are certainly a reasonable and beneficial public policy, anyone who bothers to take a brief skim of section 91 and section 92 of our Constitution will tell us this is clearly the jurisdiction of provincial governments and best left to provincial ministries of education and social services.

What I find so frustrating about the Liberal government is not only that it is bad at capitalism, but also that it is just as bad at socialism. Take, for example, the new Canada disability benefit. This program resulted from the passage of Bill C-22, a bill the Liberals introduced almost two years ago. The stated objective of this bill was actually very reasonable; it was to provide a social safety net for Canadians living with disabilities so that no one has to live in poverty due to a disability.

Personally, I have always felt programs such as this are best left to provincial governments. In my home province of Saskatchewan, we have a program called the Saskatchewan assured income for disability, SAID, program. I also believe very strongly in an inclusive society for persons with disabilities, so if the federal government wanted to join in, I certainly was not going to stand in the way. It seems that everyone else in this chamber felt the same way since Bill C-22 passed unanimously last year.

When the details of the Canada disability benefit were announced in the budget, they were certainly a disappointment for disability advocates everywhere, with the maximum benefit being only $200 per month and not one thin dime being paid out until July of next year. Two hundred dollars per month is not enough for anyone in this country to live on, even before inflation and the cost of living skyrocketed under the government.

After nine years of the Liberal government, and with the introduction of this budget, the size of the federal government and the cost of the federal government have now doubled under the Liberals' watch. After nine years, the government has come to the point where literally all of the revenue from the GST goes toward merely paying the interest on the federal debt. The Liberals are adding another $40 billion to the federal debt this year, which now stands at well over $1 trillion and rising.

I come back to the finance minister's statement, when she said that the only good thing the government can do when it comes to economic growth is to get out of the way. A more accurate statement would be that the only good thing that the current government can do is to get out of the way.

It is time for a new Conservative government to replace the Liberals and their NDP coalition partners and to fix the budget as well as the many other problems they have created. Therefore, Conservatives will vote against this budget and we will vote non-confidence in the government.