Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2

A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025

Sponsor

Status

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.

Summary

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.

Elsewhere

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:

C-31 (2022) Law Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 2 (Targeted Support for Households)
C-31 (2021) Reducing Barriers to Reintegration Act
C-31 (2016) Law Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
C-31 (2014) Law Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1

Votes

June 3, 2026 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-31, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025 (all remaining provisions of the bill)
June 3, 2026 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-31, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025 (Part 4, Division 17, that is clauses 339 to 364 of the bill)
June 3, 2026 Failed 2nd reading of Bill C-31, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025 (reasoned amendment)
June 1, 2026 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-31, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

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

  • Strengthening the national economy: The party prioritizes a one Canadian economy approach by removing interprovincial barriers, diversifying global trade markets, and establishing a sovereign wealth fund to drive major infrastructure investments across all regions of Canada.
  • Modernizing defence procurement: Bill C-31 proposes a stand-alone Defence Investment Agency to streamline equipment delivery for the Armed Forces, meet NATO spending benchmarks, and leverage procurement to support Canadian manufacturing and technological innovation.
  • Protecting Northern sovereignty: Amendments to the Territorial Lands Act give the government tools to safeguard mineral rights in the national interest, ensuring responsible resource development and deeper economic partnerships with Inuit and Northern communities.
  • Addressing affordability and housing: The legislation includes measures to lower the cost of living and accelerate housing construction, particularly near transit hubs, while maintaining robust social programs for seniors, women, and vulnerable populations.

Conservative

  • Address the economic recession: Conservatives argue the bill fails to address the current recession or reduce wasteful government spending, which fuels inflation and contributes to record-high food bank usage across Canada.
  • Reform defence procurement oversight: Members oppose Division 16, asserting it creates a bureaucratic Defence Investment Agency with broad, unaccountable spending powers and potential for patronage instead of addressing the military's actual operational needs.
  • Provide tax and housing relief: The party calls for eliminating federal fuel taxes and removing the GST from new home construction to combat the cost-of-living crisis and encourage housing development.
  • Oppose omnibus legislative tactics: Conservatives criticize the bill’s omnibus nature, arguing that substantive changes to defence procurement and transportation require separate legislation to ensure proper parliamentary scrutiny and accountability.

NDP

  • Tax corporate excess profits: The NDP criticizes the government for prioritizing corporate subsidies over families and calls for an excess profit tax on grocery and oil companies to fund public services and help Canadians manage rising costs.
  • Enforce the Canada Health Act: The party demands federal enforcement of the Canada Health Act against healthcare privatization and calls for full commitment to universal pharmacare, integrated mental health care, and expanded dental care for all Canadians.
  • Oppose international development cuts: Heather McPherson rejects the $2.7-billion cut to international development assistance, asserting that Canada is retreating from its responsibility to lead in peacekeeping and diplomacy during a period of global economic instability.
  • Address structural affordability issues: The party argues that temporary rebates fail to solve underlying economic insecurity, advocating for a focus on structural changes including large-scale housing projects and investments directly in people rather than shareholders.

Bloc

  • Lack of transparency and consultation: The Bloc opposes the bill and the government's use of closure motions, arguing that the Liberals have abandoned meaningful consultation with opposition parties and are rushing the massive bill through without proper technical briefings.
  • Fails to address Quebec's priorities: Members critize the legislation for failing to address the tariff crisis affecting Quebec's SMEs, the forestry industry's needs, and the provincial government's requests for funding regarding asylum seekers and stolen election funds.
  • Opposes oil industry subsidies: The party rejects the bill's expansion of subsidies to the oil and gas industry and criticized the classification of methane-derived hydrogen as clean, arguing these measures contradict environmental priorities and waste billions in potential revenue.
  • Concerns about passenger protection: The Bloc expresses concern that the bill reduces government accountability by allowing private firms to handle air traveller complaints, potentially leaving passengers at the mercy of companies selected by the airlines themselves.

Green

  • Restricted parliamentary debate: The Green Party opposes the frequent use of time allocation and gag orders on massive omnibus bills, arguing it prevents the necessary scrutiny and debate required for substantial legislation.
  • Weakening pesticide oversight: Elizabeth May criticizes changes to the Pest Control Products Act that replace mandatory 15-year cyclical re-evaluations with discretionary assessments, arguing this shift undermines science-based protections for human health and the environment.
  • Prioritizing economics over health: The party expresses concern that new provisions allow cabinet to override scientific health and safety decisions regarding dangerous pesticides based on economic interests, potentially compromising national safety for commercial gains.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 10:50 a.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to work with my colleague in our rural caucus, which is made up of MPs who are committed to the development of our rural regions. For us, it is clear: Building Canada strong means building strong rural regions.

It means programs tailored to life in rural areas. I am thinking of the rural transit solutions fund. Last fall, I announced an investment of over $700,000 in my riding to implement a public transit system that truly responds to the needs of rural areas. It has been a tremendous success. This has changed many people's lives. It makes it easier for them to get to work and school or to travel around the riding at very little cost.

Building strong rural regions also involves raising issues that are important to them. I am thinking in particular of cellular connectivity and the bill introduced by our colleague from Compton—Stanstead on spectrum issues to improve cellular connectivity in Canada. There are a whole range of initiatives that my colleague and I, along with other members from rural Canada, are committed to working on to build strong rural regions for a strong Canada.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 10:50 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

Resuming debate. As I recognize the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, I have to let him know that he will have about eight minutes and then he will be interrupted for Standing Order 31 statements and question period. He will be able to have the balance of his time after Routine Proceedings.

With that, the hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford has the floor.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 10:50 a.m.

Conservative

Jeff Kibble Conservative Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing my speech to bracket the all-important question and member statement periods.

I will be splitting my time today with the member for Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry.

I am pleased to rise to share my analysis of this important piece of legislation. I want to be clear from the outset that not all of this bill is without merit, but there are provisions within it that deserve serious scrutiny, serious debate and serious answers from the government.

As a member of the Standing Committee on National Defence, I have a particular and direct interest in division 16 of this bill, the establishment of the Defence Investment Agency act and the amendments to the Defence Production Act, which would be renamed the defence and national security production and procurement act. It sounds complicated. Although buried as a peripheral issue within a budget bill, in reality this is a fundamental restructuring of how Canada processes and invests in its own defence, which deserves far more scrutiny than an omnibus budget process will ever allow.

I want to be direct about something. I served nearly three decades in the Royal Canadian Navy. I served at CFB Esquimalt, one of the largest military installations in this country and the beating heart of our naval presence on the Pacific. It is a base that Vancouver Island depends on and has given more to this country than most Canadians will ever know. When I stand in the House and speak about defence procurement, I do not speak from a briefing note; I speak with 30 years of experience and of knowing exactly what happens when governments get procurement wrong. The government has this part of this bill catastrophically wrong.

Bill C-31 is 330 pages long. It touches on everything. That is the first problem. Changes of this magnitude, such as giving a minister up to $1 billion in spending authority with no meaningful oversight, deserve their own bills, their own debates and to be studied in defence committee, not buried inside a budget omnibus bill that only gets sent to finance committee. When we bury such a key strategic plan, we hide it, and when it is hidden, Canadians cannot hold the government accountable.

This is not an accident but yet another Liberal illusion. It is as if the Liberals have turned Parliament Hill into Emerald City on the Hill. They constructed a gleaming facade, the rhetoric sounds good, industry gets excited, and people are tricked into believing the illusion, while the Liberals ask Canadians to pay no attention to the wizard behind the curtain. Instead of the Prime Minister of Canada, perhaps we should refer to the position as the “Prime Minister of Oz”. My job is to pull back that curtain to reveal the reality and shatter the illusion.

Let me speak to what the Defence Investment Agency actually is and what it is not. The Prime Minister has hired a CEO, a successful investment banker with no defence experience or procurement background who used to work alongside the Prime Minister at Goldman Sachs. He is now head of the new Defence Investment Agency. It goes further than that. In testimony in committee, this CEO admitted that in his former role as a top-level investment banker, he worked with high-value companies directly connected with the communist government in China. This is a serious security risk. On a file this sensitive, it is a detail we cannot brush aside. He also worked with high-value companies that have direct connections to the defence industry. This presents a very real potential for conflict of interest.

This is not a risk Canada should be taking on one of the most consequential files this country faces, but here we are. The CEO of the DIA reports to a junior secretary of state, who reports to another minister, who reports to the Prime Minister, not at a cabinet table. There is no direct line of accountability or single point of authority. It is a rather confusing chain that only adds to more bureaucracy, red tape and delays and more boards, advisory committees, consultants and patronage. This is not procurement reform but the illusion of procurement reform. The Canadian Armed Forces cannot afford the difference, nor can Canada.

Let me share some numbers with the House, because the numbers tell the story the government will not. Only 59% of our maritime fleet is serviceable and ready for operations, and that figure only holds because the government retired the entire Kingston class coastal fleet to make the math work. Of our 12 major warships, the navy, through no fault of its own, can barely keep three fully crewed, operational and ready to deploy.

Only 51% of land vehicles are ready for troops to use. They are worn out and undermaintained. Over $2 billion a year was cut from defence budgets between 2021 and 2025. As for our aerospace fleet, only 42% of our aircraft are ready to fly. Our CF-18s are nearly aged out, and we still do not have a signed contract for the F-35s because the government spent years playing political games with the air force. I will leave the government's failure to keep our beloved Snowbirds flying for another debate.

The brave men and women who serve at CFB Esquimalt, who serve across the country, deserve better than 42%. They deserve better than 51%. They deserve more than only three operational frigates. They deserve a government that signs contracts, shows stability and has a realistic strategy to build upon, not the illusion of reannouncements and press releases and fancy-sounding new layers of bureaucracy.

It has been more than four years since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, four years since we heard the language of putting Canada on a war footing. In four years, the only increases in the production of munitions, artillery shells and rockets in this country have come through contracts with the American military, not for Canada but for America. The government never signed the contracts for our own requirements.

We can announce an agency. We can name a CEO. We can create a board. However, until we put ink to paper and actually buy the equipment our forces need, we have done nothing. Division 16 of the bill does not fix this. It locks in the inefficiencies. It entrenches the old bureaucracy. It gives the minister the power to exclude companies from competition without ever explaining why. It creates the ability to sole-source contracts without accountability. It grants authorities to procure shares in corporations and to replace directors and officers, language that sounds an awful lot like nationalization.

We have been down this road before. It is called the Emergencies Act. This reeks of the same unaccountable overreach. In clause 310, there is more sole-sourcing. In clause 322, there is a competitive process riddled with exceptions so wide that almost anything can be exempted. In clause 312, there is ministerial power to replace corporate leadership at will. There is no transparency, no explanation and no accountability.

Here is the foundational problem that makes all of this worse. Canada has no national security strategy, a strategy that should be the key foundation upon which the defence investment strategy and the Defence Investment Agency should be built. Without a national security strategy, none of this works. We cannot design a procurement architecture for a mission we have never defined—

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 11 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

I have to interrupt the member to begin Statements by Members.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-31, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Kibble Conservative Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to conclude my remarks. I was speaking about not having a national security strategy for Canada to back up the government's Defence Investment Agency and defence industrial strategy. None of this will work without this key foundation. A procurement architecture cannot be designed for a mission that has never been defined or for threats that have not been assessed. We cannot build an agency to deliver capability to our armed forces when we have not decided what capability Canada actually needs.

The Minister of National Defence admitted to me in testimony at committee that no consideration of threat assessments, pre-kinetic warfare, grey zone warfare, cognitive operations or PSYOPS is in the defence investment strategy. How could there be? That would require a foundational national security strategy, a strategy the government does not have.

Simply put, the government has put the cart before the horse, and Canadians in uniform will pay the price. Indeed, all of Canada will pay the price. This is the exact opposite of creating a self-reliant and sovereign country.

The fancy speeches, the hollow announcements and the promises are all illusions. The reality is that it seems as if the Prime Minister is more focused on building his own defence industry oligarchy.

As Conservatives, we have always stood proudly with the women and men who serve in uniform. We ask them to do dangerous things. We ask them to stand between Canadians and harm. We send them to protect our sovereignty, to serve our allies and to represent our country at its best. The very least we owe them is the right equipment, honestly procured without corruption, without patronage and without a $1-billion slush fund that answers to no one.

Vancouver Island is home to both CFB Comox and CFB Esquimalt. The families there are watching, the veterans there are watching and the serving members are watching. They are all starting to see behind the curtain of illusion, and the illusion is starting to crumble.

We will oppose division 16 of this bill, not because we oppose defence investment, but because we refuse to accept the illusion of it in place of reality. Canada deserves better. Our armed forces deserve better. The people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, who live alongside—

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:25 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:25 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe the member can actually make those statements and keep a straight face. Under the Conservative Party, they actually had just below 1% of GDP going to Canada's military.

The current Prime Minister, elected just over a year ago, made a commitment to bring it up to 2% of Canada's GDP. We accomplished that months after. Before the end of last year, we achieved the 2%. We provided support, financial pay and so forth, investing in the military and building a military industry. That is what this government has done.

What did the Conservative government do? It did zip, nothing. In fact, it closed veterans offices. Imagine what—

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:25 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

The hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Kibble Conservative Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite's question was ill-informed. The 2% NATO spending that the government constantly boasts about is truly an illusion. Money was shuffled. The Coast Guard, which is not operationally deployable, was accounted for, and that is not within the NATO regulations.

In fact, I would like to draw the member opposite's attention to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the gold and global standard for identifying government and NATO spending, which said that the discrepancy was 0.4%. In other words, Canada has only actually spent, by this gold standard assessment, 1.6%. This is another Liberal illusion, and Canadians need to see that reality. Of note, I will add that Canada was the only country mentioned with such a large discrepancy in our alleged 2% spending. It is shameful.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Burton Bailey Conservative Red Deer, AB

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his service.

Two days ago, to much fanfare at CANSEC, the Prime Minister announced a deal to purchase military aircraft from Saab, which I believe is an affiliate company of Brookfield.

Have they actually signed a deal, or is it another Liberal illusion?

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Kibble Conservative Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, indeed, there was much fanfare and much excitement from industry as this amazing deal was supposedly announced. This is more illusion, as I alluded to throughout my speech. The Prime Minister of Oz made this great announcement. Let me hold back the curtain and show the reality, right from Saab's press release. On its web page, Saab stated, “Canada has announced that they will enter into detailed discussions and formal negotiations with Saab [to be potentially] the preferred supplier of Canada’s future.... Saab has not signed a contract nor received an order.”

That is the reality. Across the way is the illusion, and Canadians are seeing through it.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:30 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I would reinforce where the Conservative Party is probably at its weakest. The member tried to paint a picture that is just not true. At the end of the day, I would compare our investments in the Canadian Forces to the Conservatives' when his leader was a member of government for 10 years. They actually dipped just below 1% of Canada's GDP. It is truly amazing that the member would try to give this false impression, as if the Conservatives actually supported the Canadian Forces, when in fact they cut nine offices from Veterans Affairs. It is delusional that the member is able to make the statements that he has.

Why does he not stick straight to the facts?

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:30 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Kibble Conservative Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I was looking at nothing but the facts, and I hear the frustration in the member opposite's voice. Clearly, reality is colliding with illusion, and his frustration is building. Let me be clear. With the investments of 1% under the Harper government, they still managed to go to Iraq and Afghanistan, because they had solid, well-founded programs that did not waste money. Right now, we are seeing creative accounting and self-reporting. When the Stockholm Institute reports on actual numbers, we see it is more Liberal illusion, just like their announcements. It is all illusion, and our military is no stronger. In fact, it is weaker under this government's illusion and failure. I am bringing reality.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders

May 29th, 2026 / 12:30 p.m.

Conservative

Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the good people of Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry to add my contributions and views based on what I am hearing in my community, the United Counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry, as well as Cornwall and Akwesasne, and bring that to the floor of the House to make sure their voices are heard.

As we discuss this piece of budget implementation legislation, it is important to acknowledge some of the breaking news today. The unfortunate news that we had from Stats Canada confirmed that under the Prime Minister, just 15 months into office, Canada has entered into a recession. We have now had two quarters of negative economic growth. We can look at the last four quarters, as a matter of fact, and we have had three quarters of negative economic growth. That is showing that despite the speeches, the photo ops and the good intentions that are always mentioned by the Liberals, we are seeing that their plan is failing to resonate when it comes to economic growth and creating jobs. We have seen tens of thousands of jobs lost so far in 2026. Sadly and very frustratingly, we are now entering into a recession, as confirmed by the government's own Stats Canada agency.

Conservatives on this side of the House are going to keep advocating for a change in direction and for getting rid of the anti-development laws that are on the books, like Bill C-69, and some of the caps that have been put in that are prohibiting and inhibiting our natural resources from getting built. Let us remember that it was this Prime Minister who promised to move at unimaginable speeds to get things done. Here we are, seeing that it can take, in cases of getting a mine built, upwards of 25 years to get a mine permitted and built in this country.

At the same time, we are seeing the idea or possibility of a pipeline out to the west coast, but we do not know a proponent, a start date, a route or the details. We are years and years away, because the Prime Minister and the Liberal government continue to put those anti-development laws in place. They are trying to weasel through certain exceptions, different side deals and MOUs. At the end of the day, we are seeing, again confirmed, a shrinking economy, not a growing one, despite the vast natural resources we have in this country.

When it comes to a change in course, it is not just those anti-development laws; it is the change in our housing policies. Right across this country, we should be removing the GST on all new home builds and encouraging partnerships with every single province to take the HST off, which could provide significant savings, not just for first-time homebuyers but for all new home builds in this country. We need to invigorate and pump-start our housing economy.

Again, the rhetoric was that the Liberal government was going to double house building in this country, to about half a million homes per year, which is what its own stats say is needed just to keep up with affordability and demand in the coming years. We are only at half that. As opposed to seeing new housing starts accelerate, we are seeing them, in many cases and over many months, decelerate, not grow. Our Conservative plan will continue to be on the table. We will continue to pressure the government in that regard.

When it comes to the high price of gas, what we need to do is go further to provide inflationary and financial relief for Canadians. The Liberals are removing only one-third of the federal taxes for one-third of the year. What we are proposing is to remove all federal taxes, not just the federal excise tax but the seven-cents-a-litre fuel standard, which under the Liberals will be going from seven cents, currently, to 17¢ a litre in the coming years, and also to get rid of the GST that is charged on the price of gas. That could provide real relief of 25¢ a litre for the entire year, allowing Canadians to keep more money in their pockets to help with the rising cost of living. This is yet another contrast and another change the Liberals could make to combat the Liberal recession that we are now in.

Of course, it is about the out-of-control spending. I hear, repeatedly, in Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry and other parts of eastern Ontario, particularly Prescott and Russell, where we have a lot of correspondence from, the frustration and the opposition to the $90-billion boondoggle that is Alto high-speed rail. The Liberal government spends $20 billion each and every year on consultants, many of them Liberal insiders who get repeated sole-sourced contracts, at a time when our federal public service has ballooned to higher levels than we had just 10 years ago.

There is the $742-million gun grab, which is an absolute waste of law-abiding Canadians' resources and time. It is costing taxpayers money, and it is not going after the root cause of gun violence in this country, which is illegal and smuggled guns. Taking a law-abiding firearm owner's firearms away from them when they go up to the Cornwall Handgun Club, for example, is not going to tackle the crisis. The Minister of Public Safety has even admitted in leaked audio that their plan does not work, but there is $742 million that has gone down the drain in wasteful Liberal spending.

It continues with the PrescribeIT program, which was $300 million spent on a software program. That was done by Health Canada, and it was supposed to digitize records. After pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the program, the Liberals decided that nobody wanted it and nobody used it. They had to shut it down, all while paying the CEO of that organization over $800,000 per year in an executive salary and bonuses. It is absolutely absurd, and it was a waste of taxpayers' money, once again.

If that is not enough, Conservatives are digging up more wasteful spending by the Liberal government. No wonder we have such a high deficit and debt in this country. The Liberals are spending $200 million over the next 10 years on a gravel pit and concrete pad in rural Nova Scotia for a rocket launch service. The company was nearly bankrupt and almost shut down. It then got an injection of $20 million with a backdated contract retroactive to last year. This infusion of $20 million saw its key investors suddenly cash out with millions of dollars, and we have a gravel pad with a concrete pad on top of it that is costing $20 million per year. The lease of that land, just for the record, was about $15,000 per year. Where is the other $19.99 million a year going? Canadians have a right to know.

When we talk about waste and about ways to lower our deficit, there are several key ways.There are the billions of dollars we Conservatives have been mentioning. That would be a common-sense way to get our finances under control.

We see the massive deficits that the Liberals have included in their budget documents this year, and they are ongoing for the next few years. The Liberals have no plans to balance the budget. I looked at the numbers and did some rough math. They are looking to add $330 billion more to our national debt in the next five or six years alone. That is on top of the $1.3 trillion or $1.4 trillion already on the debt. These Liberals have added more to our national debt than every other government combined before it. That is how bad it is.

I have said this repeatedly in my tenure in public life, and it bears repeating: The easiest thing for government to do in public life is to tell Canadians what it is going to spend money on. That is the easy part. The part that Canadians need to pay attention to, and where we are with this Liberal government, is how it is going to pay for it all. This is what we call a costly credit card budget, because that is exactly what it is doing. It is adding tens of billions of dollars each and every year. In this case, there is $67 billion in the spring statement that was just proposed and, like I said, $330 billion in new debt in the coming year.

The thing we need to remember is that, when that goes on the credit card, there are public debt charges, which is the interest to service that debt. As a matter of fact, we spent $54 billion this year just to pay the interest on our national debt. That is not paying it down. It is just paying the interest on that proverbial credit card, and that interest is expected to go up to $59 billion next year. It will then go to $65 billion the year after that, and then on to $71 billion and $76 billion. Finally, in 2030, we will be spending $81 billion per year servicing our national debt.

That is not sustainable and not the right way. Canadian households do not do that with their credit card and their home budgets. They expect, as Canadian taxpayers, government to do the same thing.

It is ridiculous to see that the new Prime Minister has doubled Justin Trudeau's deficit. Whether it is the budget implementation act or the Liberals' efforts here on defence, we are seeing more bureaucracy, more taxes and more ineffective measures. Now that we are in a recession, under the Liberal Prime Minister, it is time to smarten up and change course.