François-Philippe Champagne Liberal
In committee (House), as of June 10, 2026
Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-31.
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.
Part 1 implements certain measures in respect of the Income Tax Act and the Income Tax Regulations by
(a) providing temporary immediate expensing for eligible manufacturing or processing buildings;
(b) delivering automatic federal benefits for lower-income individuals;
(c) expanding the anti-avoidance rule for direct trust to-trust transfers to include indirect transfers of trust property to other trusts;
(d) limiting the deferral of tax on investment income resulting from the use of tiered corporate structures with mismatched year ends;
(e) clarifying the expenses that qualify as Canadian exploration expenses;
(f) implementing the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework;
(g) removing bankrupt corporations, trusts and partnerships from the exception to the debt forgiveness rules;
(h) introducing a supplementary rule to strengthen the tax debt anti-avoidance rule;
(i) expanding the clean hydrogen investment tax credit to include hydrogen produced from methane pyrolysis as an eligible production pathway;
(j) enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of information gathering during tax audits;
(k) providing that no Canada Carbon Rebate payments would be made in respect of tax returns, or adjustment requests, filed after October 30, 2026;
(l) simplifying, streamlining and harmonizing the qualified investment rules; and
(m) making a number of technical amendments, including to correct inconsistencies and to better align the law with its intended policy objectives.
It also amends the Excise Tax Act , in relation to certain measures in respect of the Income Tax Act , and the Income Tax Conventions Implementation Act, 1996 , which suspends the operation of the Canada-Russia Income Tax Agreement. Finally, it amends the Air Travellers Security Charge Act , the Excise Act, 2001 and the Select Luxury Items Tax Act in relation to certain measures in respect of the Income Tax Act .
Part 2 amends the Global Minimum Tax Act to, among other things, implement the UTPR that subjects the Canadian constituent entities of certain MNE groups to top-up tax in respect of the low-taxed profits of constituent entities of those MNE groups not already subject to an IIR or qualified domestic minimum top-up tax, implement certain aspects of the administrative guidance in respect of the GloBE Model Rules approved by the Inclusive Framework and published by the OECD and implement a number of technical amendments to correct mistakes or inconsistencies and to better align that Act with its intended policy objectives. This Part also makes amendments to the Access to Information Act , the Income Tax Conventions Interpretation Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act .
Part 3 amends the Excise Tax Act , the Excise Act , the Excise Act, 2001 and other related texts to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 3 implements certain measures in respect of the Excise Tax Act and related texts by
(a) clarifying the tax treatment of federally regulated credit unions for Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax (GST/HST) purposes;
(b) extending the application of the special GST/HST rules for certain investment plans to first home savings accounts;
(c) clarifying the application of the imported supply rules to financial institutions in respect of insurance policies or loans relating to persons resident in, or property located in, Canada;
(d) clarifying the GST/HST treatment of certain services supplied by the Canadian Payments Association or any of its members as a consequence of a recent amendment to the Canadian Payments Act ;
(e) ensuring that special GST/HST rules for financial institutions apply correctly to certain small investment plans, master pension entities, insurers that issue only annuities and sureties of performance bonds;
(f) making technical corrections to the input tax credit rules respecting the change in use of property following a sale of a business and to the GST/HST rules for financial institutions relating to mergers of investment plans;
(g) ensuring that the GST/HST applies properly to Lloyd’s Insurance;
(h) clarifying, in respect of financial institutions that do business in an HST province and at least one other province, filing requirements and rules related to the recovery of embedded GST/HST amounts;
(i) providing a six-month period, following the death of an individual who is a GST/HST registrant, during which no return of the individual or their estate is required to be filed;
(j) ensuring that a GST/HST reporting election between a supplier and its agent continues to apply despite the amalgamation, merger or wind-up of either party;
(k) authorizing the Canada Revenue Agency to share information with international tax authorities with which Canada has an information-sharing agreement, in a manner consistent with the Income Tax Act ; and
(l) making a number of technical amendments to correct inconsistencies and to better align the law with its intended policy objectives.
Division 2 of Part 3 implements certain measures in respect of the Excise Act , the Excise Act, 2001 and other related texts by
(a) making technical corrections in respect of the computation of the additional excise duty on cigars and the computation of negative amounts generated by statutory formulas;
(b) clarifying the tax treatment of certain cannabis and vaping products that are unaccounted for or that are taken for use;
(c) implementing a new limit in respect of packaged raw leaf tobacco for importation for personal use and making consequential amendments to ensure the proper enforcement of the new limit;
(d) allowing the Canada Revenue Agency to consider and grant relief to brewers in certain circumstances;
(e) extending the maximum validity period for certain licences from two years to three years; and
(f) authorizing the Canada Revenue Agency to share information with international tax authorities with which Canada has an information-sharing agreement, in a manner consistent with the Income Tax Act .
Part 4 enacts an Act and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act , the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act to prohibit financial institutions from issuing documents in bearer form and provide for the replacement of documents that are currently in bearer form.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act , the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act to provide that no action lies against His Majesty in right of Canada and federal government officials for any acts or omissions made in good faith under those Acts.
Division 3 of Part 4 amends the Bank Act to require an institution to offer or sell deposit products in a non-discriminatory manner in certain circumstances.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Financial Administration Act to provide the Governor in Council with authority to make regulations with respect to the conditions under which contracts may be entered into by His Majesty or a Crown corporation. The Division also amends the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act to provide the Governor in Council with authority to make regulations respecting the complaints that may be reviewed by the Procurement Ombudsman and the persons who may file a complaint. The Division also makes a related amendment to the National Capital Act .
Division 5 of Part 4 increases the maximum amounts for accessing the Tax Court of Canada’s informal procedure for appeals under the Income Tax Act and Part IX of the Excise Tax Act .
Division 6 of Part 4 amends Schedule II to the Access to Information Act to prohibit the disclosure of confidential information obtained under the Retail Payment Activities Act or prepared from information obtained under that Act.
Division 7 of Part 4 amends the National Housing Act to increase the total of Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation outstanding guarantees that are in force. The Division also amends the Protection of Residential Mortgage or Hypothecary Insurance Act to increase the limit for loans that are insured under that Act.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to provide the Superintendent of Bankruptcy with the power to request various orders from the court if an unlicensed person acts or represents itself as a licensed trustee, and if a person solicits from another person insolvency filings under that Act or makes representations that are false or misleading in a material respect in relation to bankruptcy and insolvency. The Division also increases the maximum fines for certain offences under that Act.
Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things, prohibit non-compete clauses and other employment-related restrictions, except in certain circumstances.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to eliminate the position of Deputy Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and to provide that the person holding that office is deemed to have been appointed as Chief Commissioner.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the International Development Research Centre Act to, among other things, reduce the number of members of the Board of Governors of the International Development Research Centre from 14 to 12.
Division 12 of Part 4 amends the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act to provide that a review of the provisions and operation of that Act must be undertaken within five years after the report on the previous review has been tabled in both Houses of Parliament rather than every two years and to specify the period within which the report on the review must be tabled.
Division 13 of Part 4 amends the Pest Control Products Act to replace the mandatory re-evaluation of registered pest control products with a requirement for the Minister of Health to initiate a re-evaluation if, after carrying out an assessment, that Minister has reasonable grounds to believe that the health or environmental risks of a product have increased significantly.
Division 14 of Part 4 amends the Territorial Lands Act to, among other things,
(a) empower the Governor in Council, if the Governor in Council is of the opinion that it is in the national interest, to make orders
(i) to take certain measures with respect to certain lands in Nunavut, including to cancel licences to prospect, the recording of claims or leases of recorded claims or to provide that claims are not to be recorded, that leases of recorded claims are not to be issued or that licences to prospect or leases of recorded claims are not to be renewed, and
(ii) to provide for prohibitions associated with those measures for the persons that are the subject of the orders, including prohibiting the making of an application for a licence to prospect, to record a claim or to lease a recorded claim;
(b) provide that the Minister of Northern Affairs may determine whether compensation is to be paid to certain mineral rights holders that are the subject of the orders referred to in paragraph (a) and, if so, the amount; and
(c) empower the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting the implementation of the orders referred to in paragraph (a) and the compensation referred to in paragraph (b).
Division 15 of Part 4 amends the Red Tape Reduction Act to, among other things, ensure that the provisions of the Official Languages Act , or the provisions of an instrument made under that Act, cannot be the subject of an exemption under Part 2 of the Red Tape Reduction Act .
Division 16 of Part 4 contains measures relating to procurement, production and investment in respect of national defence and national security.
Subdivision A of Division 16 enacts the Defence Investment Agency Act . That Act establishes the Defence Investment Agency, whose mandate is to assist the Minister who presides over that Agency in the exercise of the Minister’s powers and performance of the Minister’s duties and functions relating to production, procurement and investment in respect of national defence or national security. That Act also provides for certain other powers, duties and functions of that Minister. Subdivision A also makes related and consequential amendments to other Acts.
Subdivision B of Division 16 amends the Defence Production Act to, among other things,
(a) extend the application of that Act to supplies and projects related to national security and to services related to national defence and national security;
(b) provide that the Minister who presides over the Defence Investment Agency has exclusive authority to acquire supplies and services related to national defence and national security that are required for the purposes of a department, board or agency of the Government of Canada, subject to certain exceptions;
(c) extend the purposes for which that Minister may engage in stockpiling to include national defence and national security, including economic security, and the defence and security of an associated government or other state;
(d) provide that Minister with new financial authorities, including the authority to enter into financial transactions for the purpose of investment in national defence and national security sectors; and
(e) establish procurement rules in relation to national defence and national security.
Subdivision B also makes consequential amendments and terminology changes to certain legislative texts.
Division 17 of Part 4 amends the Canada Transportation Act to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Governor in Council to choose to have the backlog of air travel complaints resolved by third parties engaged by the Minister of Transport or the Canadian Transportation Agency;
(b) transfer responsibility for the resolution of air travel complaints from the Canadian Transportation Agency to the Minister of Transport;
(c) authorize the Governor in Council to choose to have future air travel complaints resolved by third parties approved by the Minister of Transport;
(d) transfer authority to make regulations respecting air passenger rights from the Canadian Transportation Agency to the Minister of Transport;
(e) remove mandatory confidentiality requirements regarding air travel complaints; and
(f) increase the maximum administrative penalty payable by corporations for certain violations of the Canada Transportation Act or its regulations.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-31s:
This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Bill C-31 is a complex budget implementation act that establishes a new Defence Investment Agency to streamline military procurement, amends the Pest Control Products Act, and implements various fiscal measures. Opposition parties have criticized the bill as an omnibus measure that lacks transparency and accountability.
Liberal
Conservative
NDP
Bloc
Green
Grant Jackson Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his important work standing up for the veterans of this country. No higher purpose, as I see it, really exists in this Parliament and in this country than standing up for those who have put on a uniform and put themselves in harm's way for the rest of us.
Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
An hon. member
You closed down the office in Brandon. You know that, right?
Grant Jackson Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
Madam Speaker, to the member for Winnipeg North, I love this question because, yes, the office in Brandon was temporarily closed and moved to Shilo. The Liberals made hay of that when they were in opposition. They have since closed the Brandon office that they reopened. I wonder if the member for Winnipeg North knows that. It closed last year, permanently.
Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
An hon. member
No.
Grant Jackson Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
Madam Speaker, yes, they gave up the lease, and the entire staff has been moved to Canadian Forces Base Shilo.
Blake Richards Conservative Airdrie—Cochrane, AB
Madam Speaker, before we get too much into that debate, the members over there who are heckling right now should understand that that is exactly what happened. The members over there are taking a very hypocritical action. That is for sure.
I stand today to address Bill C-31 and division 16 of that bill. I cannot help but feel a sense of concern among Canadians about what we are seeing here. It seems that the Liberal government makes announcement after announcement, and plan after plan, but it never actually implements anything. At times, people have been tempted to see some promise in some of the announcements and things that they hear, but Canadians are now starting to realize that once those announcements are made, nothing happens afterwards. The fear here is that this pattern is going to continue.
There is concern around this so-called Defence Investment Agency. The express purpose of this agency is to expedite the process for procuring new materials and new supplies for the Canadian Armed Forces, but the new agency has been announced with no real framework on how it would work. This bill attempts to address the powers of the new minister who would oversee this agency, but it leaves an awful lot to be desired. It leaves many grey areas that have members of the Canadian Armed Forces, and Canadians more generally, very concerned.
To start, there are many grave concerns about accountability. This seems to be a troubling pattern with the Liberal government. There seem to be some real, grave concerns about the accountability of this new agency, and the Liberals refuse to indicate who this new minister would be. There are provisions in the bill that would give this new minister immense power, to, for example, sole-source contracts on a wide variety of things without any oversight. Based on the sheer number of spending scandals that have been tied to the Liberal government over the past more than a decade, how can Canadians feel even remotely comfortable with the Liberals giving their ministers more power to spend without any oversight?
Division 16 would allow the Liberals' new agency the authority to spend on more consultants, despite the record number of bureaucrats they already employ to do the same work. It is well known that Liberals have abused the use of contractors and consultants to pay their own insider friends, and people are left to wonder how this would be any different.
The division also provides extremely loose definitions of what would be counted as defence spending under this new agency. It would allow the minister untold powers to sole-source products and materials, even when they are only just very remotely connected to matters of national defence.
Canadians need to have a clear understanding of what the Liberals are setting up in this agency, especially after they have misused so many taxpayer dollars on so many other occasions. The Liberals use what can sometimes be seen as good causes, and this would certainly be one of those, and they claim they are in the national interest, but then they use them to pay out their friends and to turn projects into slush funds. They did this with things like the green slush fund, the ArriveCAN app, SNC-Lavalin and, most recently, PrescribeIT.
How can Canadians who are eager to see investment in and rebuilding of our Canadian military feel secure that Liberals will establish a new agency and grant the minister of this agency so many powers, to take loans, advance payments, give government financial guarantees, give grants, establish corporations and buy shares, and do this all with no oversight in place? The Liberals have done absolutely nothing that would warrant the trust of Canadians, yet they are marching ahead with new ways to pay themselves and their friends, and they are trying to shroud it as defence spending.
I wonder if the Liberals could give the House even one example of past military procurement projects being held up or drawn out due to transparency in funding. Are they really suggesting that there is too much accountability in spending and that that is what has prevented the government from investing in the military? I doubt they can make that argument.
If that is not their argument, then why introduce these provisions buried in the back of a division in an omnibus budget bill? This reeks of corruption, and Canadians are not satisfied with the answers they are getting.
There are ample examples in the bill of the new agency's being granted the power to bypass procedural fairness in contracting and procurement processes, but to what purpose could that be? How can avoiding open competition for procurement projects and being able to sole-source contracts without explanation possibly result in the best use of taxpayers' funds for our military?
Bill C-31 would grant the new minister of the agency the ability to spend up to $1 billion without any checks and without any reporting mechanisms in place to show Canadians what was purchased for the spending. Clauses in the bill would grant this unnamed minister the ability to purchase shares of corporations using taxpayer funds and to replace members, directors and officers at their own discretion. Once again, this is the government famous for enriching its friends by giving them taxpayers' money and putting them in prestigious positions while the military suffers with outdated equipment and Canadians line up at food banks.
The loss of trust does not end there, though. It also deeply affects veterans in Canada. This is especially troubling because the Liberals are so certain that all these new announcements will attract record numbers of Canadians to join the armed forces. That is what we keep hearing over and over again. While the Liberals assume this will happen, they turn around and treat Canada's veterans like they are just a bother, a hindrance to get rid of, rather than treat them like the heroes they are and give them the help they deserve.
How can the Liberals expect Canadians to line up outside recruiting offices, when they see thousands and thousands of veterans left injured, homeless, changed by their service and not getting the help or resources they need once they are released from the military? I have heard, in my role as shadow minister for Veterans Affairs, from hundreds if not thousands of veterans who say that while they are proud of their service to Canada, they would never recommend the forces to their children or loved ones, because of how poorly the government has treated them since they left. They often say this with a broken heart, because they love the country they served and want our armed forces to be successful. When our veterans are warning Canadians to stay away, we have a much bigger problem.
The Liberal government needs to stop with all the talk and start with some action. The Liberals have been in power a year with the new Prime Minister, and it has been more than a decade that they have been in power in total. The only thing we have to show for it so far is an economic recession.
Most of the provisions in Bill C-31 lay out how the Liberals can spend more money on contracts and consultants, but nothing is mentioned about actual defence procurement. The one area that Canadians do want to see some spending in is our defence and veterans. The Liberals are dragging their heels and are busy trying to bury in legislation ways that would allow them to spend without any oversight rather than really doing the work of building up the military. This same omnibus bill approach, designed to not allow Parliament the proper time to check and analyze the contents, made historic cuts to veterans services just months ago. More than $4 billion was cut from veterans services in this budget.
On one hand, when the Liberals are caught trying to sneak in legislative changes to make it easier for them to enrich their insider friends, they tell Canadians that these provisions are actually going to make things better and make the ranks of the military swell with new recruits. However, on the other hand, they make the largest cuts to Veterans Affairs. This cognitive dissonance is not lost on Canadians or on members of our armed forces.
Through creative accounting, the Liberals are claiming they are spending 2% of our GDP on the military, despite the fact that they are counting things such as infrastructure spending, personnel benefits, the civilian Coast Guard and other things in their calculations to reach this conclusion, and these are all things that NATO will not count toward the 2% criteria. Now the Liberals stand before the House, after slashing support for veterans, after years of numerous scandals and after billions wasted on consultants, and ask Canadians to trust them with these new measures that would make it easier for them to abuse taxpayers' funds. I say that is something of great concern to many Canadians.
Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Charlottetown P.E.I.
Liberal
Sean Casey LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence
Madam Speaker, Oxford University Press chose the word of the year in 2025. That word was “rage bait”, and that speech was exhibit A.
When the member claims there has been $4.2 billion cut from the Veterans Affairs budget, he knows better. He knows that the $4.2 billion is an actuarial calculation that simply states the present value of a future obligation for medical cannabis, which is now being reimbursed to veterans at the market rate. There are no cutbacks. The same amount of cannabis is being distributed, only now the price that is being paid is the market rate. That is what is reflected in the $4 billion. Rage baiting is when one takes that and misconstrues it into something they know full well it is not.
Is the member ready now to stand up and acknowledge that is in fact the case and stop the rage baiting?
Blake Richards Conservative Airdrie—Cochrane, AB
Madam Speaker, I would be ashamed of myself if I was to stand and ask a question like that. I understand the role that the parliamentary secretary plays to defend a Prime Minister who is indefensible, frankly. However, when he stands up and tries to tell us that $4 billion is for cuts to cannabis, how much cannabis are the Liberals planning on handing out to veterans? That is a heck of a lot of cannabis.
Another thing we are hearing from veterans in long-term care is that they are being shortchanged. We hear from RCMP veterans who are having their pensions reduced. We hear about cuts to the bureau of pension advocates, which is the group that helps veterans get their benefits when they are denied by the government far too often. These are the kinds of impacts. The BPA cuts alone will mean five-year wait times for veterans to finally get the benefits they have worked so hard to deserve.
How can the member stand up and try to pretend that somehow we are manufacturing this? I guess all Canadians, veterans and everyone else who is crying about all of these horrible cuts are all rage baiting too, apparently. However, I will tell members right now that it is the government that is mistaken and it will pay the price for it.
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Madam Speaker, one of a federal government's values is how it treats those who served our country. Veterans do not need more announcements. They need timely services, reliable benefits and access to the supports they have earned.
With this budget adding more debt and pushing interest costs above $50 billion a year, could my colleague explain how Canadians can have confidence that veterans will remain a priority when so much of the government's revenue is being consumed simply by paying interest on past spending?
Blake Richards Conservative Airdrie—Cochrane, AB
Madam Speaker, the first thing I would say to that is there is a bit of a premise to the question that I would take disagreement with. The member mentioned the idea of veterans remaining a priority. I would argue that veterans have never been a priority for the government. This budget only further proves that.
I mentioned already some of the things that we have seen cut, but the member, very correctly, raises some of the concerns that we see among Canadians more broadly, like food bank usage and homelessness. These things affect veterans, unfortunately, even more acutely than the general population of Canadians as a whole, so they are feeling those things worse than ever. However, when they go to seek the help they need because of the service they have given to our country and the injury that has caused them, we owe them as a country to make sure we are there for them. We have not been there for them. Under the government, as the member mentions, far too many veterans are homeless, using food banks and cannot get the help they deserve, need and have earned from the government.
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Madam Speaker, I feel like I am unrecognizable today.
In summary, I have concerns when I look at Bill C‑31, especially the part about public contracts. The bill says that this division amends the financial administration to authorize the government to make regulations with respect to the conditions under which contracts may be entered into, despite any other act of Parliament. Essentially, the main amendment seems to be adding Crown corporations.
Are federal Crown corporations becoming the new way to get around the Financial Administration Act?
We just finished studying this at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. Clearly, Crown corporations are like black holes: Accountability is not the same as within a department. Is it still a democracy when the government skirts the law and uses Crown corporations for expenses that the government should be incurring itself?
I would like to ask my colleague that question.
Blake Richards Conservative Airdrie—Cochrane, AB
Madam Speaker, I will just say that the member raised a lot of very good questions. They are questions that do not have answers. I think the reason they do not have answers is that the government is deliberately trying to avoid being accountable and being transparent. This is another way, just another way of many, to reward all of its friends, all the Liberal insiders, and it is being done at the expense of Canadians.
Braedon Clark Liberal Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS
Madam Speaker, the world is changing rapidly, profoundly and, in many ways, irreversibly. It is more divided, more volatile and more dangerous than at any point since the end of the Cold War. In this new reality, the assumptions that shaped decades of Canadian defence and security policy no longer apply, and the threats we face are no longer just hypothetical scenarios. At the same time, we are dealing with rapidly changing methods of warfare, driven by the proliferation of drones, artificial intelligence, space-based weapons and new technologies that are still emerging.
The world has changed, and Canada must change with it. That is why our government is strengthening Canada's sovereign capabilities and critical sectors and deepening co-operation with trusted partners. To keep us safe and secure, we are making generational investments to rebuild, rearm, and reinvest in the Canadian Armed Forces, which will have a profound impact on my home province of Nova Scotia, where 20% of Canadian Armed Forces members are stationed.
With a bold new approach to defence procurement, we are transforming how we make those investments so that our military has what it needs, when it needs it, and so that Canadians benefit economically from those investments. This transformation is firmly anchored in Canada's first-ever defence industrial strategy, which was launched this past February. It is a landmark framework that sets a long-term vision for how we can strengthen our defence capabilities while building a more resilient, innovative and competitive industrial base right here at home.
At the centre of that strategy is the Defence Investment Agency. The agency plays a critical role in modernizing and accelerating defence procurement, ensuring we can deliver the right capabilities to the Canadian Armed Forces when they are needed most. At the same time, it is driving stronger investment, deeper partnerships and more meaningful engagement with the Canadian defence industry, helping to position Canadian companies to grow, innovate and contribute to both national security and economic prosperity.
Let us be honest. In the past, Canada's defence procurement system has been slow, complicated and fragmented, particularly when it comes to decision-making and accountability. We have all seen this movie too many times before, with our most critical defence procurement projects taking decades to complete in some cases. What we have in this country is a procurement system that at times struggles to respond to urgent operational needs, and this has come at a cost to the readiness of our armed forces, as well as our defence industrial base. Of course, this is not due to a lack of commitment or professionalism; rather, it is a reflection of a system that was simply not built for the dangerous environment we face today.
Canadians last year elected a government that would focus on building one strong economy. In doing so, we created Canada's first defence industrial strategy, which establishes a whole-of-government approach to transform Canada's defence industry and procurement system. It rightly prioritizes Canadian suppliers and materials wherever possible. It invests in Canadian innovation, commercialization and export potential, and it provides industry with a more streamlined, predictable and transparent demand outlook. The goal is straightforward: to strengthen Canada's strategic autonomy while building prosperity here at home. This strategy is going to get us there.
Over the next decade, we project that we will see an increase in Canada's defence exports by 50% and that we will raise the share, critically, of defence acquisitions awarded to Canadian firms to 70%, supporting our homegrown businesses and innovators in the defence space. The size, capability and competitiveness of Canada's defence industry as a result will, of course, grow. That means more high-quality and high-paying jobs for Canadians, from aerospace engineers to cyber specialists and from advanced manufacturing to digital technologies.
The Defence Investment Agency is the engine that will turn this strategy into reality. The DIA has a clear and focused mandate to re-equip our military faster and more effectively while leveraging defence investments to strengthen Canada's defence industrial base and attract private capital into the sector. It is designed to accelerate procurement timelines and bring sustained leadership and accountability to the largest defence investments made in generations in this country. The agency in its current form was launched in October 2025 as a special operating agency within Public Services and Procurement Canada.
In a very short time, it has already demonstrated its value, advancing major procurements such as Arctic over-the-horizon radar and the Canadian patrol submarine project, which are foundational to the defence of Canada, which, of course, has the longest coastline in the world. We know that the Defence Investment Agency, to fully deliver on its mandate, must be established as a stand-alone entity with the authorities, governance and agility required to match the scale of our government's ambition. That has always been the plan.
In our spring economic update, our government proposed $103.8 million over five years, starting in this fiscal year, and $22.3 million ongoing, to establish and operate the DIA as a stand-alone organization. Today, we debate a second act to implement certain provisions of the budget, which was tabled in Parliament on November 4 of last year, specifically on the defence and national security production and procurement act.
To be clear, the legislation is not about bureaucracy. It is about capability. It is about speed. It is about aligning procurement with strategy, industry with security and investment with outcomes. This includes actively advancing initiatives aimed at reducing red tape and improving efficiency, which would ultimately reduce duplication, increase time savings and streamline processes.
These initiatives would allow us to better align with our G7 and NATO partners, which, as we know, is more important than ever, as today's global challenges, including international peace and security, global economic stability and growth, and the digital transition, require Canadians and allies to work together to find shared solutions. That is why Canada is working with G7 and NATO partners to build a new era of collaboration, one rooted in trusted partnerships, competitive economies and innovation that delivers for people and businesses. This is especially critical when it comes to the defence sector.
This moment in history demands seriousness of purpose and a new approach to defence procurement, which is at the heart of our debate tonight. Since day one, our government has acted, and we are seeing results. Last fiscal year alone, Canada invested more than $63 billion in defence, the largest increase in generations. In March, Canada reached the NATO alliance's benchmark of spending 2% of GDP on defence five years earlier than planned, and we are on a path to meet the 5% NATO target by 2035. That is imperative because when Canada invests in defence, we are investing in Canadians, our workers and our innovators, and all of our future responsibilities.
The changes we propose are necessary, timely and forward-looking. They recognize that Canada's security and economic strength are inseparable and that we must be able to act quickly and decisively in a more dangerous world. By establishing the Defence Investment Agency as a stand-alone entity, we are building a procurement system fit for today and for the future. We are backing our armed forces with the tools they need, and we are backing Canadian industry and business with opportunity and certainty, helping to ultimately establish Canada's place in the world as a strong, reliable and capable ally.
For all of these reasons, I urge all members of the House to support the Defence Investment Agency and, as a result, support a stronger, safer and more resilient Canada.
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Madam Speaker, my question will be very brief.
I am going to ask my Liberal colleague to list all the major victories the government has scored against Donald Trump, his tariffs and his tariff threats.
If he could just quickly list all the victories, all the gains the government has made against Donald Trump over the past year, that would be great.
Braedon Clark Liberal Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS
Madam Speaker, my colleague's question was very brief; I thank him for that.
As I said in my speech, the defence industry is so important in Nova Scotia that the budget allocates $63 billion to it.