Finance Committee on June 4th, 2026

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Like I said, Canadians have seen that we have a declining deficit. I think Canadians understand that it's important to restore fiscal discipline.

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

Minister, I have one last question to ask.

There are 2.2 million Canadians going to food banks, and one in four Canadians are food-insecure because of your policies. The Prime Minister spent $200,000 on lavish meals on three flights. Do you think that's fair when you guys are sending record numbers of people to food banks?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

June 5 is tomorrow. On June 5, 12 million Canadians will be receiving the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. Affordability is top of mind for Canadians, and that's why we're acting with respect to rent, food and gas.

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

Is it fair that the Prime Minister spent $17,600 on salmon? That's $100 more than what a Canadian will spend on groceries this year. Do you think that's fair to taxpayers?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Like I said, again, I'm here to do a serious thing. The serious thing to do in a moment like this is to support Canadians. Affordability is an issue—

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

Do you think it's taking things seriously when $200,000 is spent on lavish meals—

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

—of concern to not only Canada but all of our partners.

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

—on three flights? Is that fair?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I could not hear the question, Madam Chair.

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

It's very clear. The Prime Minister spent $200,000 on lavish meals on three flights. When your government has spent record numbers—

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Hallan. That concludes your time.

We'll continue now with Dr. Martin for six minutes.

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Thank you, Minister, for being here this morning.

I'm delighted to have the opportunity to ask you about federal funding for health, food security and the social sector, overall, and about the impact of those investments, when a province, territory, sector or municipality chooses to pull back on its investment, because the federal government has stepped up. That's a very important issue in my riding.

I represent the riding of University—Rosedale, where I've been speaking with advocates for food security. As a former health executive, I've observed this phenomenon in action: The federal government declares a priority and wishes to invest to make lives better for Canadians. I won't name names, but a given municipality, province or private sector player then sees that investment as an invitation to get out of funding the existing programs themselves, such that we don't see any net improvements, necessarily, on the front lines.

I'm curious about whether you could speak to where in the spring economic update you see risks in that regard.

What tools do we have to respond to that?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I want to thank the member for her question, Madam Chair.

Thank you, honourable member.

First, let me say what a pleasure it is to see you here, in Parliament. It's great to see that we can attract people with experience and expertise in the health sector. Your experience is going to serve us well, guiding us in the months ahead.

You're right. In the spring economic update and the 2025 budget, we addressed provincial concerns about how the federal government could help the provinces with their health infrastructure needs.

You will know, by now, that the federal government had not been investing in health infrastructure directly. Obviously, we have the Canada health transfer, which supports health care in provinces and territories across the country. This was in direct response to a request made by the provinces.

That is how you constructively work in this federation. I must give kudos.

This was something the Quebec government had asked for. It wanted specific support for health infrastructure. I'm sure you saw the investment that was recently announced by the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of Quebec. A total of $10 billion will go towards infrastructure. That kind of partnership is good for the economy, infrastructure and health.

When it comes to health, it's not for me to suggest to this committee what to do, but I would think, in this day and age—when I compare us with other G7 nations, or with Nordic countries—one should be looking at innovation. You're well placed to do that in this committee. What are the key innovations you see in the health field to improve services and make sure Canadians get the best possible services they deserve?

We often look at funding for health, but there is also innovation in how we do practices and processes. We should inspire the best practices to make sure we deliver the best possible care to Canadians. That could be something this committee helps with through a study the government can analyze. Broadly speaking, what are other colleagues doing around the world, or in the G7 or OECD?

Everyone is facing a level of pressure when it comes to the fiscal framework, and different countries have adopted different approaches. I'm very much looking forward to your advice on this.

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Thank you.

I want to continue on the theme of housing, particularly for vulnerable people. I want to respect, of course, that we're talking about Bill C-30 today, but I can't help but be influenced by the pre-budget consultations that this committee has been undertaking in parallel with this bill.

We've heard from many witnesses about the importance of ensuring that when we talk about building housing infrastructure, we do so with an eye to particularly marginalized or vulnerable groups, whether that's people with disabilities or families and women fleeing intimate partner violence.

Can you talk a little bit about how you see Bill C-30 responding to the needs of groups whose housing requirements won't fit into the regular market structures?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you for this very important question.

When you look at affordability, we've seen, going back to what my colleagues and Canadians understand, that global events are translating now into affordability issues. Canada is not immune to that. It's the same thing. I just came back from the G7 meeting in Europe a week or so ago. We're now seeing a clear nexus between food security, energy security, economic security and national security. What you're seeing in the Middle East and with the tariff situation, it's all translating into an affordability issue.

The first pillar of affordability—and the chair would know this because she's done a lot of work on it—is having an affordable and secure home. People want to have an affordable home, so they don't have to pay more than they should in terms of their disposable income for housing or rent. That's the key pillar. That's why you've seen a focus on generational investment. It's to provide more affordable housing.

To your point as a health specialist, it's the whole spectrum to make sure we do that in the appropriate way

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Dr. Martin. That concludes the time.

We now go to Mr. Ste‑Marie for six minutes.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, Ms. Dancey and Ms. Lavoie, it's always a pleasure to see you and get to talk to you.

Good morning to everyone on the committee, the chair and all the support staff.

Minister, I want to discuss a number of things with you.

I'll start with the Saint‑Michel sawmill, which has sought creditor protection. My understanding is that the Business Development Bank of Canada provided some initial support, but it doesn't seem to be enough.

Does the government intend to do whatever it takes to save sawmills like the Saint‑Michel sawmill, by either improving the assistance it provides or, as we've been recommending, introducing a system to buy back countervailing duties, whereby the government would get its money back once the dispute with the U.S. government was settled?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

First off, you're an exceptional colleague. I always really enjoy working with you. I'm glad to see you at the Standing Committee on Finance. I've had the opportunity to appear before you a number of times now.

When it comes to softwood lumber and sawmills, I'm from the Mauricie region, as you know, so forestry is part of our DNA. I have good news. Yesterday, the minister, Mr. Hodgson, met with industry executives, and federal and provincial stakeholders in that very important economic sector, which has been dealing with difficult circumstances for a very long time, as you pointed out. It's been going on for decades.

That's why we've created tools with the Business Development Bank of Canada to help the sector get through this time and explore opportunities for innovation. I think profound changes are needed. The federal government has a role to play and the provincial governments have a role to play, as you know, when it comes to fibre, the cost of fibre and the availability of fibre, to secure long-term prosperity for the industry. That's the reason for yesterday's big meeting. I think we are moving in the right direction.

I talk to people in the forestry industry regularly, to see how the programs we've put in place are addressing their current needs and how the programs can help the industry pivot and position itself for the future.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you.

The sawmill is Matawinie's biggest employer, so we obviously want the government to do everything it can to help.

Now I want to talk about something else in Haute‑Matawinie, the housing situation in Manawan. A month ago, Amnesty International released a very troubling report highlighting the housing shortage. In some households, 23 family members are crammed in together, or the parents have to share their room with five children. Houses have mould problems and need major repairs.

Does the government intend to fix the problem, as the former prime minister had pledged to do by 2030?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

First, I would like to extend my greetings to the Atikamekw community of Manawan. You know, you and I are constituency neighbours. I have the pleasure of representing the people of Wemotaci and Obedjiwan, who are in the same community.

Obviously, seeing this report, this situation, affected me. I even saw Manawan community representatives yesterday, I believe. They were here in Parliament. We said a quick hello.

We've invested heavily in housing. Is there more to do? Certainly. Of course, I share your concerns about the situation, particularly in Manawan. It's in our part of the country. We want to find the best solutions for the people who live there.

I'll be discussing this matter with the minister responsible to find out the exact situation in Manawan. How did we get there? What measures can we take? A great deal of money has been invested in infrastructure and housing for indigenous communities. We want to see how these funds are being invested to help the people of the Manawan community, for example.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you.

Yesterday, Sipi Flamand, the chief of the community, was on the Hill. He was able to speak with Minister Gull‑Masty. He was able to speak directly with the Prime Minister about this matter a few weeks ago. So we hope that the government will be able to meet his needs.

On another completely different topic, you have no idea how disappointed I felt when I saw, at the end of last week, the decision by your colleague, the Minister of Industry—the member opposite me—to cut back on what you promised two years ago. You promised to provide support for organizations that champion consumer rights, such as Option consommateurs and Union des consommateurs.

You said, two years ago, when you were Minister of Industry, that you would triple the support and that you would commit $5 million a year over five years. It has been two years now, and everything has been cut. This is taking resources away from these organizations, which carry out incredibly important work on shrinkflation, air passenger rights, and so on.

Can the government reconsider this penny‑pinching decision?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

First, thank you for your question.

I want to thank them. You know, I know them a bit, the people from Option consommateurs and the various organizations that you mentioned. Of course, when we look at how we can streamline our programs and become more efficient, we have various tools in the tool box. We also focused heavily on the tools in the tool box of the Competition Bureau, which plays a key role. As you know, these organizations are also funded in large part by the provincial governments. This includes, of course, Option consommateurs, which is funded by the Quebec government.

We're partners. However, I think that there are different ways to support these organizations. Of course, in our streamlining plan, we're looking at how we can better contribute to this objective. Clearly, we're heavily involved in the competition issue.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

Mr. Lefebvre, you now have the floor for six minutes.

[Éric Lefebvre, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good morning, Mr.—