Debates of Oct. 9th, 2025

Border Security

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Bay of Quinte for his very hard work.

The strengthening Canada's immigration system and borders act would strengthen our border and keep Canadians safe. It would ensure guns and fentanyl are off our streets, and it would assist law enforcement with the required tools to do its job properly.

I want to take this moment to thank the frontline RCMP, CBSA, CSC and CSIS staff, who work on the front lines each and every day. I want to wish them a happy Thanksgiving.

Official Languages

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we learned this morning that the Prime Minister delivers only 17% of his speeches in French. When I had the honour of being part of the previous Conservative government, all speeches began in French. Today, the Leader of the Opposition prioritizes French in his speeches.

This is not England. Is the Prime Minister aware that French is also a language of business in Canada and around the world?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture and Minister responsible for Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I have a little news flash for my colleague across the aisle. We are the government that has done the most for official languages in Canada. We modernized the Official Languages Act and, as part of the process, made a historic $4-billion investment in our official languages across the country.

For the first time in the country's history, we met our target of 4% for francophone immigration outside Quebec. We are at 7%. We are going to hit 8% and then get to 12%. This is historic. It is unprecedented. That is my little news flash for my colleague across the aisle.

Labour

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I often hear members of parties in the House say that they support workers. In fact, I have heard a lot about workers today, yet when I tabled my bill to protect the right to strike in collective bargaining, it was crickets from the Liberals and Conservatives. Words are one thing but action is another.

If the Liberal government really respects workers, will it protect their rights by supporting my bill to remove section 107 from the Canada Labour Code, yes or no?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, we have significantly strengthened the rights of organized labour in this country, which started in 2015, when the Liberal government repealed union-busting legislation that was presented and passed by the Conservatives, which was another untrustworthy move. We strengthened the Canada Labour Code, making scab labour illegal and investing in union-based training. We will continue to work with labour organizations and businesses to make sure the relationship remains balanced and productive.

International Trade

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we all know that Donald Trump is erratic and very difficult to deal with. However, the Prime Minister's growing list of concessions and appeasements is clearly not working. The latest sees him offering up the Keystone pipeline to the Americans and getting nothing in return. This is an uneconomic, environmentally damaging project that directly contradicts his pledge to reduce integration with the U.S. economy.

What happened to the Prime Minister who promised Canadians a strong approach to Trump's aggression?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, businesses from all over the world are choosing Canada as a foreign direct investment opportunity. We rank among the top two countries in the G20 for foreign direct investment. In fact, contrary to the words on the other side of the aisle, we have inflation coming down and the Bank of Canada cutting the benchmark interest rate to 2.5%. We are in a free trade agreement with every other G7 country. These are more than just agreements; they are bridges to economic resilience, and we will keep going hard.

Business of the House

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it being Thursday, it is time for the Thursday question. I would like to use this opportunity to ask a few very specific questions.

First and foremost, we see that the embattled public safety minister has had to come, cap in hand, back to the House of Commons and restart his efforts with Bill C-2. It was literally the first piece of legislation the government introduced, and the government has had to do a complete do-over because it got it so wrong, infringing on Canadians' individual rights and liberties, completely violating charter principles of the right to privacy and due process. Now that the Liberals have tabled the do-over, mulligan piece of legislation, I would like to ask them when they might be calling that piece of legislation.

Second, I would like to ask the Liberals something very specific. The member for Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay has asked for an emergency take-note debate on softwood lumber. We note that yesterday the Prime Minister came home empty-handed; he did not get a deal on softwood lumber tariffs. Many mills have been closing across the country, and my colleague, who represents a lot of the forestry workers in British Columbia, has asked for an emergency take-note debate. I am wondering if the government will agree to that and schedule such a debate.

I would also like to seek the opportunity to help inform the Prime Minister. He said during question period that the Liberals voted against something that does not exist when it comes to the oil and gas production cap. I have here the actual regulations for the oil and gas production cap. Perhaps the Prime Minister has not had a chance to read that, but, if the House gives its consent, I will table that right now.

Maybe the government could also tell us what the business will be for the rest of this week and all of next week.

I have one more thing. Before we go, I would like to wish all Canadians a very happy Thanksgiving. I hope that all members of the House from both sides of the aisle, and all the support staff who work here and help this place place function, have a great, happy Thanksgiving with their friends and family.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The hon. member is asking for unanimous consent to table a document.

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

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The hon. government House leader has the floor.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Minister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the only thing I will agree with my esteemed colleague on is wishing all Canadians a happy Thanksgiving.

We have much to be thankful about in this country, and that includes a very healthy and vibrant democracy and exchanges like this one. We have a lot of blessings in this country, and I wish every Canadian a happy Thanksgiving.

The member referred to an emergency take-note debate, but Mr. Speaker, I would never presume to impede your judgment in these matters.

This afternoon, however, we will continue with debate on the opposition day motion brought forward by the Conservative party that, let us agree, always includes a bit of sketchy detail, despite what the hon. member tried to convince us of.

Tomorrow we will resume consideration and second reading of Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act.

When we return on Monday, October 20, we will begin debate at second reading stage of Bill C-12, an act respecting certain measures relating to the security of Canada's borders and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system and respecting other related security measures, introduced yesterday by the Minister of Public Safety. We will continue that debate on Tuesday.

On Wednesday, we will resume consideration of Bill C-10, an act respecting the commissioner for modern treaty implementation.

I will end where I began, by wishing everyone a happy Thanksgiving.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of clarification, the request was for a take-note debate on an emergency basis. It is within the government's purview to grant take-note debates. Am I to take it that the request has been refused?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think the member should take it that the request is under consideration with a little dose of skepticism. It cannot be much of an emergency if we did not have an opposition motion on that very matter today.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I really think question period today highlighted the fracture in philosophies on the best way forward for the Canadian economy. What we heard in question period today from the Liberals, time and again, was that if we keep spoon-feeding and force-feeding the failed policies of the last 10 years, it might work, instead of letting free enterprise and the capital market move forward with the ability to invest on its own.

In question period today, the Liberals were talking about direct foreign investment into Canada. The reality is that it is almost zero when there are no government dollars attached to that investment. We have seen those investments in Ontario and in different places. However, they would have never happened under the current economic climate unless there were taxpayer dollars involved.

If we go back in time, that was not the case. Large corporations could examine the Canadian market, take a look at the investment climate, the labour pools and all the different services that went into it. I am talking about before 2015. They could make their own decisions, and they did not need Canadian taxpayer dollars to make the investments; they would just come here.

It has not been great in the last 10 years. In fact for Canadian companies, unfortunately, the majority of the time when they have a chance to make an investment in Canada, they definitely are not doing so. They are choosing somewhere else. Unfortunately we see that in the news every day.

Another one is AI. It is a buzz word on the news, in business and everywhere else. At the beginning of the year, the United States announced there would be a $500-million investment into the broader AI sector. None of that was government dollars; it was all private dollars. There has actually been a lot more since that, NVIDIA being the greatest example. It is allocating $100 million out of its own free cash into AI, ChatGPT, in the United States.

It is pretty quiet up here in Canada. The only investment we really see is from the Government of Canada. Why is that? It is because the climate, not the weather climate but the investment climate, is not great. The other thing is that there is no extra electrical capacity in this country, partially because of all the red tape in seeking approval to start projects.

There is a lot I would like to continue on with. Of course unemployment, unfortunately and amazingly, under the current Prime Minister, and it is almost unbelievable I am saying this, is higher than when Justin Trudeau was the prime minister. I do not think the current Prime Minister ever thought that would happen. As well, there have been 86,000 job losses since he was elected. I do not think he ever thought that would happen, but it did.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, first off, I think it is important that we do not necessarily recognize the Conservatives as throwing the AI industry in Canada under the bus, when in fact the AI industry in Canada is doing exceptionally well. The potential to grow is there. It is very real and tangible.

The Conservatives consistently try to give a false impression with respect to Canada's debt situation and deficit. When we look at the G7 countries, which include countries like the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom, we see that we are actually doing better than they are with respect to debt-to-GDP.

My question for the member is this: Does he believe that all those other countries around the world are in fact broken too?

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, nobody is putting down AI. Simply put, I am saying that when given the choice where to invest, investors are picking the United States. That is all I am saying on that.

When it comes to the debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7, I do not know why the Liberals even bring it up anymore. Once we get to 100% debt-to-GDP ratio, it is over. No country has ever recovered from that. Basically we are comparing ourselves to countries that are terminal financially. Without a great debt jubilee, it is over for them, like Japan, the United States, etc.

Why do we want to be the best of the worst? Why do we not just want to be the best?

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's speech was very inspiring. He talked about the importance of private investment dollars. I agree with him.

I wonder if he could comment on how free enterprise private investment dollars have a unique ability to find the most productive place in the economy compared to politicians' poor track record of distinguishing between winners and losers.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question. I can give an example. Over 20 years ago in my riding, where I used to work, the owner of Wescast Industries at the time made a decision to make a huge investment in Wingham, Ontario to build a new foundry where exhaust manifolds would be built and sold around the world. It was the largest manufacturer of them in the world. There were 2,000 employees in Ontario at Wescast Industries during the period of 2003 to 2004. Do members know how many there are today? There are zero.

That is the tale across many communities in Ontario and in Canada. I know that the softwood lumber industry is feeling it now. Those jobs do not come back. The dollars to build the foundry at that time were from private investment, not government grants.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I could not believe what the member said. I said that Canada was the best in terms of GDP-to-deficit ratio in the G7. The member came back and asked why we would take any sort of happiness in the fact that we are the best of the worst.

If the United States, Germany, France and the United Kingdom are the worst in the world, we are in a lot of trouble, a lot more than one could possibly imagine.

I am wondering whether the member would apologize for making such a bizarre statement. Is he trying to say that the United States and the G7 countries are on a downward trend, which would mean that the whole world is broken?

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member had better ask his Prime Minister, because I am sure he will give him a lesson on macroeconomics.

We can take just one simple measure: the price of gold. That is where stability is found for countries. When the Liberal government was elected in 2015, the price of gold was $1,200. The price of gold today is $4,000, and that is not because the government has been doing a great job; it is because everybody else around the world knows that the economy is broken.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Now we are responsible for the price of gold?

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if the member from Kingston and the member from Winnipeg do not get it, I am sorry but you guys are the ones who are sitting at the cabinet table and are saying that the ship is going great. It is not going great; it is going badly.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Before we resume debate, I want to remind members that comments must be directed through the Chair. The Chair is not responsible for the price of gold.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Bourassa.