House of Commons Hansard #390 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was confidence.

Topics

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:20 p.m.

Bloc

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Mr. Speaker, I believe that the motion compelled you to interrupt the proceedings, which you did.

The government representative chose not to speak. However, her decision not to speak must not violate the right and parliamentary privilege of members of the opposition parties to make statements, followed by a question period. I do not believe that unanimous consent is needed to proceed in this way. I believe that you, as the Speaker of the House, have the power to decide. It is up to you to decide the length of the speeches, whether 10 minutes or 20 minutes, but there must be speeches. I would remind members that, outside the House, journalists are commenting on the contents of the economic update, while we, parliamentarians, have no such privilege. That is totally unacceptable. Ask anyone and they could answer that question in 30 seconds or less.

I invite you to seriously consider that you have the right to force this debate. If you need to, I suggest that you suspend the House for a few minutes to consult the clerks and the House staff to determine precisely how to move forward. I believe that you have a duty to preserve a semblance of democracy in a country that, need I remind you, is part of the G7. I have extremely bright colleagues who are perfectly able to intervene on the economic update.

If people in the government are unable to do so, that is on them. However, you have a duty and the power to give us the floor.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order.

I just spent the past few hours in camera analyzing the budget documents and preparing to speak in the House because there was an agreement allowing me to present my party's position.

I analyzed the document with colleagues and with my entire team. We prepared our position to present in the House.

At the very least, each party should be allowed to present its position. If the government is too disorganized to do so, that is too bad, but we are prepared and we want to discuss this.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:20 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, and it is not often that I get a chance to do this, but I feel it is important to rise to concur with the opposition MPs who have stood in the House to call on you to bring the government to order and present to the country what its vision of the future is so that we can have an adequate debate. I find it rather gormless that they came into the House, dropped the document and then left without an opportunity for us to debate here today.

I am prepared to listen to the member for Vancouver Kingsway present the NDP's vision for the future of this country, and I know that the other opposition parties also have their vision. That is what a Westminster system is designed for. There has been disorder in the House, but certainly nothing more chaotic than what we have witnessed over the last hour here.

I call on the Speaker, in concordance with members of the Bloc, the Conservative Party and, indeed, the Green Party, to bring the government to order to allow us to have a full debate on the fall economic statement.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Greg Fergus

I understand the hon. member's frustration in this situation, but the Chair is bound by the decision that was passed by the House. After much debate and consultation, I have to follow the order that was made by the House. I interrupted the proceedings, and the minister chose not to make a statement. Therefore, the rest of the motion does not apply.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

Bloc

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order.

With all due respect, we disagree with the decision that you are making and with your interpretation of the motion.

This is all a bit surreal. I do not have the right to say who is here and who is not, but I can say in a roundabout way that there are not a lot of government caucus members here right now. That is an unbelievable affront. You cannot just ignore that.

This is a great opportunity to gain the confidence of many members and to show that you are serious about managing the House, even if it means calling a vote. I think that we will have a majority and that we can have a debate. That would be the bare minimum.

Right now, this is being debated outside the House in the media. What an absurd situation this is.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Greg Fergus

Unfortunately, it goes beyond my power as Speaker to circumvent an order that was adopted by the House of Commons. I consulted the clerks at the table to see what the options are, but there are no options available to us on this issue.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. I certainly hope that we will be able to respond to this very important document at this time. We have a responsibility to be transparent with all Canadians. It is important that we discuss this document that was tabled in the House.

As such, I am going to try again. I move that notwithstanding any Standing Order, special order or usual practice of the House, immediately following the adoption of this motion, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings to permit one member from each recognized opposition party and a member of the Green Party to make a statement of up to 20 minutes, followed by a period of up to 10 minutes for questions and comments related to the fall economic statement.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Greg Fergus

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Surely the hon. member for Winnipeg North would at least give the country the courtesy to rise in his place right now and to tell the rest of the country why he continues to shut down this debate.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

I would like you to consider this as a matter of contempt of Parliament. The finance minister resigned this morning at 8 a.m. The economic statement was to be delivered at 4 p.m. this afternoon. The Prime Minister had ample opportunity to appoint another finance minister and deputy prime minister and have them sworn in to issue the fall economic statement. That to me, and I hope you agree, is a point of contempt. The government knew this motion was in place and that it was agreed to by all parties. It failed this Parliament and therefore failed Canadians, and I believe it is in contempt.

Fall Economic StatementPoints of OrderOrders of the Day

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

As the NDP finance critic, I have attended the lock-up, I have read the fall economic statement and I have gone to considerable lengths, along with my colleagues, to prepare the New Democrats' response to this. What I find patently unfair is that the government has chosen to release that document to the public at four o'clock. That document, a very thick book of policies, is now circulating, but there is no opportunity for any other opposition person to have a comment on that, whether Conservative, Bloc, New Democrat or Green, and that is patently unfair. In fact, I would say that it is undemocratic.

You cannot allow the government to present its case and then not allow opposition to present its case in return. That may be how autocracies work, but that is not how democracies work. Mr. Speaker, I would ask that you allow a specific member from each party to have up to 20 minutes so that we can have our comment on this document, as the Liberals have.

I find it, frankly, a little infuriating that the government has allowed its voice to be heard in this document, but stands in this House and says “no” to allowing any other party to have its say. That is not democratic.

The House resumed consideration of the motion, of the amendment as amended and of the amendment to the amendment.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:30 p.m.

Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeLeader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, I must admit that I am shocked to be rising in the House of Commons to announce this government's deficit. Usually, the Liberals would be the ones to announce the deficit in their economic update. However, they came to the House of Commons to table an economic update without even wanting to give a speech about it. They do not even have a finance minister who is brave enough to talk about it. He is hiding at Rideau Hall rather than doing his job.

There were three finance ministers today. The former minister of finance and deputy prime minister stepped down. Right after that, the Minister of Industry automatically became the finance minister under cabinet's system of delegation. He immediately announced that he, too, was resigning because he did not want to take responsibility for the country's finances given what he had just learned about them. The Minister of Public Safety, who was responsible for securing our broken borders in light of the U.S. president-elect's tariff threats, has now become the Minister of Finance.

However, he is nowhere to be found. His whereabouts are a great mystery. What is no longer a mystery, however, is the staggering size of the deficit. We were promised that the federal deficit would not surpass the $40-billion guardrail. The reality is that the deficit has reached $62 billion. That is 55% higher than promised eight months ago. It is out of control.

I will give the former finance minister credit for seeing, a few months ago, just how dangerous this government's deficit was. It was threatening to increase inflation, slowing interest rate cuts, jeopardizing our social programs and slowing our economic growth. That is why she said there would be a red line to prevent the deficit from going beyond $40 billion. It was a guardrail. Guardrails prevent buses from falling off cliffs.

Then the Prime Minister took the wheel. He pulled to the left. He hit the guardrail. The bus is now falling off the cliff and is at the bottom of the ravine in a big pile of debt that threatens the future of Canadians. That is why, today, we are announcing that we are going to vote against this plan. We are calling on the NDP do its job, for once, and vote in favour of a non-confidence motion on this out-of-control, corrupt and costly government. We need an election. That is what we need.

Here is an astonishing fact. My grandfather came to Canada from Ireland. Why? Because Ireland was poor. Today, Ireland is twice as rich as Canada. It has a GDP per capita of $100,000. Ours is $50,000. Although they have no oil or natural resources and lack the huge advantage of living next to the United States, which has the largest economy in the world, the Irish are now twice as rich as we are because they made good decisions. I was told that there are only two kinds of people in the world: Irish people and people who want to be Irish. From an economic perspective, that is true.

Ireland reduced taxes, cut the red tape to speed up big projects, and opened its economy to give entrepreneurs economic freedom and to reduce the size of government. The Government of Ireland costs 23% of the country's economy. Here, it costs more than 40%. When the Irish government was cut in half, the wealth of its citizens doubled.

We know what to do. We need to break down all the barriers that governments have put in place. We need to cut back on bureaucracy, consultants and corporate nonsense, which is a big waste of money. We need to reduce deficits and taxes, eliminate red tape, and allow freedom of competition and open-mindedness. This will let us generate bigger paycheques that people will bring home to invest in their communities. That will let us lower inflation and taxes and have a dollar that keeps its value.

That is what we are going to do to fight the threat that future President Trump and his tariffs pose. We are going to bring investment back to Canada to build things and to become the freest economy in the world and the richest people in the world. That should be our goal.

Enough with the chaos, division, poverty, homelessness and misery caused by the NDP-Liberal socialist government. Now we need to get back to the principle of common sense, the basic principle. We are going to bring home the promise that anyone, no matter where they come from, can work hard and fulfill their dreams, that people can earn a big paycheque or pension so they can pay for affordable food and housing in a safe community. That is what common sense means. That is what we are going to do to put Canada first.

I rise today, flabbergasted by the news that has just been made public. The government has finally revealed its true deficit number. Let us remember, the finance minister, this outgoing and now former finance minister told the world that she was putting in place guardrails to limit the damage that her deficits could do. Her deficit plan was $40 billion, a mind-bogglingly large number, that was already contributing to rekindling inflation, again.

This $40 billion was too big. It was out of control, as it was. However, at least to her credit, she said, “No more than that.” She decided she would have a guardrail. We know a guardrail is meant to stop vehicles from flying off cliffs. She was trying throughout the year to avoid going off the cliff.

There were two people on the bus who had other ideas, the Prime Minister and carbon tax Carney. The two of them went to the front of the bus, they grabbed the wheel, they pulled it sharply to the left, smashing into that guardrail, and she tried to resist. They pulled even further to the left, and they stepped on the gas. The bus flew off the cliff, and now Canadians are at the bottom of the ravine in a big pile of debt.

However, instead of taking responsibility, the Prime Minister told her that she should take all the blame. That when the ambulances, the police cruisers and the fire department arrived, she should take the blame for running the bus off the cliff, and that carbon tax Carney and the Prime Minister could innocently sit back. The Prime Minister could then put carbon tax Carney in charge of driving the next bus. The good old boys in the back room would protect themselves and make the then-finance minister take all the blame.

It reminds us of the way they treated the former Attorney General, a brilliant and brave first nations woman who refused to kowtow to corruption. It reminds us of the way the Liberals treated Jane Philpott and so many other brave women who have dared question the self-described feminist Prime Minister. Indeed, some feminist he is, throwing the bus off the cliff and throwing women under the bus. That is his real record.

His real record on finance is yet another $62-billion deficit. For context, outside the current government, no government in the history of Canada has ever run a $62-billion deficit. Not even in the nineties, when The Wall Street Journal said we were a third world basket case, and not even during the massive global economic crisis did the deficit come anywhere close to that, yet here we are.

With the global economy growing, with the American economy booming in stable times, this deficit is 100% at the feet of the irresponsible Prime Minister and his personal economic adviser, carbon tax Carney. Now Carney says he does not even want the job of finance minister. He does not even want to try to drive the crashed-out bus after he helped run it off the cliff. The Liberals could not find anyone all day. In fact, no one will appear today to defend this incredible disaster of a budget.

We can look at the consequences in human terms: We have 1,400 homeless camps in Ontario and 35 homeless encampments in Halifax alone. Two million people are lined up at food banks. Scurvy is making a comeback. The government admits that one in four children is going to school hungry every single day. Unemployment is rising and, according to the budget, expected to exceed 7% by the end of next calendar year. The gap between per capita GDP in Canada and the U.S. is now 30,000 Canadian dollars, although it was equal 10 years ago. This is the worst gap since at least the Second World War, and some say it is the worst gap in a century.

Canadian workers are only getting 55¢ of investment for every dollar an American worker gets. A half a trillion Canadian investment dollars, which works out to almost a quarter of our economy, has left, net. It has gone to the United States to build pipelines, factories, warehouses and business centres; Canadian investment dollars are paying American wages while our workers go starving for investment and for salaries to pay their bills.

When I travel across this country, I consistently meet two types of people. There are those who are a little better off. I will be very blunt about this. They tell me that if I do not win, they will leave the country. They are very numerous. I do not worry about them as much. Do members know whom I worry about? I worry about the ones who cannot leave. Using very blunt language, they are the ones who tell me, “I don't know what the hell I'm going to do. I have no idea how I'm going to pay my way.”

I met a waitress at a restaurant not long ago. She came up to me, grabbed me by the hand and said that I have to win. I thanked her and said that I appreciated her support. She said, no, it was not a compliment. Then she told me her story. She was working one full-time job and two part-time jobs just to pay her bills. This is a single woman in her late fifties, and she was tired of working all the time. She had cut everything out of her budget, every creature comfort and everything she enjoyed about her life, so that she could drop one of those part-time jobs. One morning, she woke up, walked outside and her car was gone. She called her insurance, and they said they were not going to cover the replacement value. She had to take that job back because she simply cannot live her life without a car.

Colleagues can bet their bottom dollar that the guy who stole the car was probably out on bail. This was not his first job. This woman's taxes and heating bill have gone up. Her wages have not gone up. She is scared to go out in the streets, in places where they did not even lock the door not long ago. These are the people we are fighting for.

These silly games over here are very entertaining, as is the soap opera that everyone is seized with today. That is all fine, but there are real people whose lives are on the line. We have a duty to work for them.

Quite frankly, this woman does not see me or any of us as any kind of saviour. They see us all as a last hope. In fact, she does not want to be saved; she just wants her life back. She was taking care of herself just fine before her tax, her heat and her grocery bill went through the roof and her car went missing. She was doing everything right.

I met a guy at the Labatt brewery a few days ago, and members can watch the video of me talking with him. He walked up to me and said he works three jobs, but his family cannot make it. They are renting. They have no hope. They have given up on ever owning a home. They can barely make it. He said to me that he feels ashamed when he talks to his kids because they ask why he is never around and why they can never have a house. He feels like a failure.

He did not fail. He has been failed. He has been robbed of the promise of Canada. It was a very simple promise: If we worked hard, we got a good life. It was not fancy or extravagant, but we got a house with a yard, where we could have kids playing safely. We could have a nice dog that we could afford to feed, along with the kids. Our kids could play safely in the streets. That was the promise.

Politicians break promises all the time, but do we know what was bad about this promise? This promise did not belong to the Prime Minister. It was not his promise to break. It belonged to all of us. Our purpose is to bring home that promise for that young man, that young father, and that older female worker, so that they can take back control of their lives once again and live in a safe country where their hard work earns them a good wage, where the rent and food are affordable and where, when they go to bed at night, they know that they will be safe throughout their sleep and that they will have their car in their driveway in the morning. Our purpose is to have a country where people are proud to fly the flag again, where they know that the government is a servant and not a master and where they understand that the Commons, this place, works for the common people every day, not for the ego of one man desperate to cling to his job.

We must remember that we are servants in this place. We have a job to do on behalf of the people who sent us here. Our personal dramas are not important. The dramas that should seize all of our concern and imagination are the daily dramas of the working women and men who build this country. We are in it for them. We are going to give them control of their lives back in the freest country on earth, Canada. Let us bring it home.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Greg Fergus

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Bow River, Carbon Pricing; the hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton, Democratic Institutions.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, there is no one who tries to portray a false impression that Canada is broken more than the leader of the Conservative Party does, both inside and outside the House. The reality is that Canada is the best country in the world to call home. We can do a worldwide tour where we will see that, whether it is interest rates or inflation rates, Canada is virtually second to no other G7 country. When we think of such things as foreign investment, we were third in the entire world in 2023.

To the leader of the Conservative Party, I say that Canada is not, in fact, broken. I would remind him that he sat around a cabinet table with Stephen Harper, to whom Canadians sent a very resounding message back in 2015. A third party took over as the government of the day because his government back then was such a disaster.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, absolutely everything is broken today, and 70-plus per cent of Canadians agree with me on that. The borders are broken. There are half a million people here illegally, according to the government's own documents. The immigration system is broken. We now have refugee camps, something we only used to see in third world countries. They are being set up across our country in formerly tranquil and peaceful suburbs. The drugs and disorder have broken our communities. We have lost more people to drug overdoses in the last nine years than died fighting for Canada in the Second World War.

Absolutely everything is broken after nine years of the pathetic Prime Minister, who is hiding under his desk right now.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Mr. Speaker, I agree with a lot of what my hon. colleague said in terms of his description of how difficult it is for many Canadians. I do not know that I would say everything is broken, but I can say that a lot of people are broke. A lot of families are struggling. Fifty per cent of Canadians are living paycheque to paycheque, and one out of four parents is skipping meals to feed their children.

The NDP proposed giving those people an immediate cut by permanently removing the GST from life's essentials, such as home heating, all grocery items, cellular and Internet bills, and diapers. However, he voted against that. If he thinks everything is broken and truly believes that people are struggling right now, why did he vote against the NDP motion that would have given people an immediate 5% break on life's essentials?

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, I find it incredible that, even when there is no Liberal minister willing to defend the temporary two-month GST tax trick, the NDP is there to defend it for them.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

An hon. member

You voted against a permanent cut. That's dishonest.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

We have a tax trick that will cost more to administer than it will save anybody, that many vendors are not even implementing and that will be gone before it starts. The NDP member has—

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Greg Fergus

I would ask the hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway, who had the opportunity to ask a question, to please wait until he is recognized by the Speaker again.

The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, the member wants me to tell the truth about the permanent tax change. There is a permanent tax change he has supported, which is to jack up the carbon tax on absolutely everything. He has voted to quadruple that tax to an eyewatering 61¢ a litre that would literally grind our economy to a halt. It would take food off grocery shelves, take parts out of factories and shut down the farm vehicles that bring us our food. It would be a nuclear winter if the tax increase that he has voted to legislate into place ever happens. That is why we need a carbon tax election: so that I can axe the tax.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:55 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is rare that the Green Party gets to put a question to the leader of the official opposition, so I will take this opportunity.

I will start by saying there was nothing in his statement with which I could disagree, because it vaulted us into a frenzy of patriotism. I love this country. There is no place in the world I would rather live than in Canada, but the hon. leader of the official opposition also maybe gave us a chance to get to know him a bit better. What would he do instead?

He mentioned he had met a waitress. He has known me for a long time. I was a waitress for more than a decade and could not afford to go to university, but only in Canada was it possible for me to go to law school as a mature student. Since I did not join a political party until I was over 50, what jobs has he held in real life outside politics that make him think he could be prime minister?

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

I would be happy to talk about jobs, Mr. Speaker. My first job here was to help pass the Federal Accountability Act to crack down on the corruption that we have seen on the Liberal side. I then helped cut the GST so that Canadians could save when they made every single consumer purchase; it was cut from 7% to 6% to 5%. I worked with former prime minister Harper to help balance the budget and rebuild the military so that we would have necessary equipment to help destroy al Qaeda after the attacks of 9/11. I helped deliver the lowest inflation of any government in 40 years, leaving behind a balanced budget and the best balance sheet of any government in the G7.

In fact, it turns out that the job experience I have is best aligned with the job that I promise to do. Now let us bring it home.