House of Commons Hansard #37 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was economy.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Opposition Motion—Cost of Deficits Members debate the Liberal government's economic policies, focusing on deficit spending's impact on investment, jobs, and the cost of living. Conservatives contend deficits drive down investment, citing 86,000 net job losses and "unsustainable" finances, urging spending cuts. Liberals assert Canada has the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7, attributing inflation to global factors, and defending investments and tax cuts. The Bloc Québécois agrees with "abysmal" management, criticizing forgone revenues and oil subsidies. The NDP proposes an excess profits tax. 33100 words, 4 hours.
Opposition Motion Members debate Canada's economic state. Conservatives argue Liberal government spending fuels inflation, job losses, and declining investment, worsening the cost of living crisis. They advocate for fiscal discipline and private investment. Liberals defend their record, citing Canada's strong G7 standing, and highlight initiatives like tax cuts, housing programs, and a plan to "spend less to invest more" in the upcoming budget. They attribute inflation to global factors. 25200 words, 3 hours.
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, if government spending is inflationary and just contributes to inflation, does that mean that the budget the member ran on, of spending an additional $106 billion, would have contributed to inflation as well?
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, we will recall that in 2015, Justin Trudeau was the prime minister. He came in and said that just a little red ink would help Canadians.
We then fast-forward to 10 years later. There is still a Liberal government in place, and Canadians are worse off than they have ever been in terms of being able to afford the necessities of life.
Food bank lines are longer than they have ever been before. It is because the government decided that its policy would be to take on debt after debt by going into deficit spending. It is wrong.
Alexis Deschênes Bloc Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech, which is firmly rooted in the reality of her constituents. I want her opinion because we in the Bloc Québécois also think that this government is mismanaging public finances and that—
Opposition MotionBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
There is a problem with interpretation. I will let the member start his question or comment over again to give the member for Lethbridge the chance to hear the whole thing.
Alexis Deschênes Bloc Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC
Mr. Speaker, I was congratulating my colleague on her speech, firmly rooted in the reality of her constituents. I would like her opinion. We in the Bloc Québécois think that the government is mismanaging public finances and that our deficit is much too high and is the result of several bad moves. One of those bad moves made by Mr. Carney's government was to cancel the carbon tax—
Opposition MotionBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I must interrupt the hon. member. The Prime Minister's name should not be mentioned.
Alexis Deschênes Bloc Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC
We will get there, Mr. Speaker. This government's decision to repeal the carbon tax outside Quebec in the middle of an election campaign meant that nearly $4 billion was refunded to people who had not even paid it.
I understand that my colleague from the Conservative Party was probably opposed to carbon pricing, but does she agree with me that giving away nearly $4 billion in election handouts in the middle of an election campaign, when that money had never been paid, was bad public policy?
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member points to a greater problem at play here, which is a government that is very much out seeking votes. At that point in time, it was conveniently during an election that this money was reimbursed. Of course, as he mentioned, it went to folks who did not even pay into the pot of money to begin with.
Why did the Liberal government make that decision? Why did it give this extra $4 billion to these folks who had never even paid into the carbon tax to begin with?
I have no other explanation than to suggest that perhaps the Liberals were simply seeking votes. It is wrong. It is a misuse of Canadian dollars.
Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Lethbridge has been around this place for a fairly long time. I have been here about six years now.
We have heard these wonderful slogans. One was during COVID, that we were going to go into debt so that Canadians would not have to, which was said by Justin Trudeau.
Another one was that we were going to “build back better”.
Another wonderful slogan from Justin Trudeau was, “the budget will balance itself”.
We are now hearing that the new line is, “we are going to spend less to invest more.”
Does she think that this will be as successful as the other bumper sticker slogans?
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, there are these catchphrases that are used by the Liberals, such as how we are going to go into debt so that Canadians do not have to. That debt gets put on the backs of Canadians. It is our children and our grandchildren who are going to pay that debt.
What kind of sloppy statement is that? The government is going to go into debt so that Canadians do not have to? Where the heck is the government going to get that money from?
There is no money for government without taxpayers. That is exactly where that money is going to come from.
Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke about the cost of living. I would like to know why she voted against affordable child care, a concrete measure that allows parents to participate fully in the labour market. What do the people of Lethbridge think about their MP opposing affordable child care?
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to tell this member exactly what those in Lethbridge think about their plan.
The members in my riding hate this Liberal plan with regard to day care because it has taken away quality, spaces and put them in a place of desperation. They have fewer dollars in their bank account than they have ever had before, and now they do not have proper access to day care for their kids.
John Brassard Conservative Barrie South—Innisfil, ON
Mr. Speaker, we are here debating a motion at a point in this nation's history when Liberal delusion is meeting the fiscal reality of Canadians and Canadian businesses.
The delusion is that Canadians have never had it as good as they have it today. The reality is that Canadian families and single moms are worried about putting food on the table and keeping a roof over their heads. Canadian businesses are not investing. In fact, we are seeing a lot of investment leaving this country because of doubt and uncertainty and because of the tax regime of this country. Yesterday, I met with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, and it is quite concerned about the tax regime in this country.
Delusion is actually meeting reality, and just this week, we learned of what that reality may look like. MNP financial issued a note on a survey it did. The reality of the headline, I think, speaks volumes as to where we are at today as a nation: “Canadians face ‘heat or eat’ decisions as financial strain deepens”. That is the headline this week. MNP financial did a survey of Canadians. Would members like to know what it found? Again, Liberal delusion is meeting the reality of Canadians:
Canadians’ financial vulnerability is worsening, with the MNP Consumer Debt Index sliding two points to 86—its lowest September reading since 2023. Growing numbers report making painful trade-offs: 29% [of Canadians] have reduced utility consumption [which is up five points, year over year] and 24% say they are eating less to save money [which is down four points, year over year]. Nearly half [of Canadians] (48%) are within $200 of insolvency each month [which is up six points, quarter over quarter], and the average cushion after bills has fallen to $744 (from $916). Fewer than half (46%) have six months of emergency savings, leaving many households exposed as winter heating costs approach.
Where are they cutting back? Again, it is Liberal delusion meeting with Canadian reality: “Beyond heat and food, Canadians are changing daily habits to cope. 51% are grocery shopping more strategically (meal plans, bulk buying, coupons, price matching). 45% are avoiding impulse purchases and 41% have stopped dining out or ordering takeout.”
When we listen to the Liberals, and we have heard them today, Canadians do not care about debt-to-GDP ratios, despite the fact that the Liberals are wrong. We have the second-highest unemployment rate in the G7. These are all the realities that Canadians are facing right now.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. What today's motion says is that enough is enough. What the Liberals are doing is not working. The reality of Canadians is that they are suffering.
Four million Canadians are using food banks. We have seen it increase in Barrie sixfold since 2020. Just a couple weeks ago, I was at the Barrie Food Bank. It is serving 7,600 families a month right now, and 44% of the people it is serving are children and seniors. Those who used to donate to the food banks are now users of food banks in Barrie. This is cascading across the country. Four million people are using food banks every month in this country. It should not be that way.
In the last government, we saw increased debt and deficit, which caused inflationary pressures that have caused many Canadians to feel the price increases at the stores for groceries, and for other items, including heat and hydro. They cannot afford to live anymore, based on the fiscal policies of the last 10 years.
The government has trumpeted the fact that it is a new government since the April election. The reality is that it is the same government since 70% of the people who are in that cabinet today were in cabinet in the Justin Trudeau government, and they are responsible for 80% of the spending occurring in the government today. It is not a new government. It is the same government employing and deploying the same tactics and the same strategy of debt and deficit that is causing so much hardship to Canadians.
After the last election, we have a Prime Minister right now, who is not so much a PM, but more a portfolio manager, who promised the world to Canadians and that he was going to be different. He is anything but, because we are now seeing that the deficit is projected to be $60 billion. I suggest it is going to be a lot more than that. There are a lot of people who are much smarter than me who are suggesting it is going to be a lot more than that. We are also seeing debt increase.
There is a budget coming November 4, which is basically a bait and switch. We know the Liberals are going to try to cover up as much as they can in terms of the actual amount of the debt and deficit through this new budget regime. They are not going to be fooling anybody. All eyes will be on the government to see just how much of a bait and switch this new budgetary regime it is announcing is going to cause.
I say to people all the time that it is naive to think that the Prime Minister left a multi-billion dollar company making multiple millions of dollars for some virtuous reason to make $400,000 as the Prime Minister because he wanted to come back to save the nation. I have said this before in the House, but he came back to keep the kleptocracy alive, to allow those in the inside circle of the Liberal elite party, and all of those who are well-connected insiders and lobbyists, at the trough to maintain access to the Treasury.
Every single problem we have in this country, such as the inflation, the debt, the deficits, the housing crisis, the health care crisis and the immigration crisis, everything, all started before Donald Trump became the President of the United States. Everything did, yet the Liberals continue to use Trump as an excuse.
What we are saying with this motion today is that enough is enough. The Liberals cannot keep doing the things they are doing and expect different results.
Lastly, I want to focus on the issue of resources and building our resources out. Canada has the best innovation, labour and human rights standards in the world. We have the third-largest and fifth-largest reserves in the world. As long as legislation like Bill C-69, Bill C-48 and the emissions cap exist, it will continue to limit and impede our ability to create the revenue we need to pay for the debt and deficit the government has not only accumulated over the last 10 years but also continues to accumulate going forward.
We cannot keep attacking our energy sector. We have what the world needs. We have clean Canadian energy that we can feed the world. The problem we have right now, as long as these pieces of legislation exist, and as long as we continue with our emissions cap and an ideological attack on our energy sector, Canada is falling behind to a point where we are not going to supply the world, but we are actually going to enter into a supplementary mode.
We can supply the world with clean Canadian energy, create billions and billions of dollars in revenue and great-paying jobs for our fellow Canadians, including indigenous Canadians, right across the country, yet this ideological attack continues and limits our ability to create these revenues. This will keep happening as long as we keep doing these things. This motion is calling for us to stop doing what we are doing, because it is not working. Canadians are paying the price every single day the government continues on the path it is on.
John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the members opposite for finally getting a motion before the House that has Justin Trudeau right in it. There is a strange Conservative obsession with the former prime minister. I think Conservatives are going to go to Spirit Halloween and get an animatronic of Justin Trudeau to jump out of the bushes to scare children.
As we head into Thanksgiving, we have our new government and the newly elected member for Carleton, who is just right here. I would like to wish him and his constituents a very happy Thanksgiving. They have something to be thankful for because they finally exorcised the ghoul living in the basement.
Opposition MotionBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
The last couple of words the member said were, I hope, not in reference to a current member of the House. In the spirit of Thanksgiving this week, I want to wish all members a happy Thanksgiving, but we should be careful with how we define other members of the House.
The member for Barrie South—Innisfil.
John Brassard Conservative Barrie South—Innisfil, ON
Mr. Speaker, I know you said “I hope”, but I believe the comment was directed at a member currently sitting in the House, which goes to show the indifference the Liberal government is showing toward the plight of Canadians right now.
The Liberals think everything is a big joke. It is not a joke for a single mom who cannot afford to put food on her table or a roof over her head. It is not a joke for a business owner, their family and their employees, who are counting on that business to continue to function, as long as the government keeps attacking people through increased taxation and regulation.
We are not talking about a joke here today. The Liberal members may see it that way, but there are millions of Canadians who are suffering each and every day in this country. They are making ends meet just to get by, and enough is enough.
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, today's motion contains some things that we agree on, and some things that we agree on less. What we most agree on is our impression that there is no one at the controls, that the government has lost control of public finances.
I am going to cite a few figures about the deficit since last December. It all started a long time ago, but I am going to talk about events over this brief period of time. The finance minister resigned in December 2024 because she was about to present an economic statement that included a $42-billion deficit. The Liberal Party's platform in the last election mentioned a $62-billion deficit. The Parliamentary Budget Officer talked about a $68-billion deficit. Right now, according to the C.D. Howe Institute, we are headed for a $100-billion deficit.
How can we continue to forfeit revenues with such alarming figures to contend with?
John Brassard Conservative Barrie South—Innisfil, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased the hon. member for Shefford brought up this point. I am very thankful she is as concerned as I and my family are for the state of finances in this country.
There seem to be no guardrails, and the member is quite right. I remember the fiasco the day the former finance minister resigned. I remember the former House leader coming in and dropping the fall economic statement on the table. There was really no opportunity to discuss it.
We have not had a budget in this country in 18 months. We have no idea what the government's revenues or expenditures are, except what is being signalled by the Parliamentary Budget Officer and others. With Halloween coming up, it is scary for all Canadians.
Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK
Mr. Speaker, this debate is very much like the crime debate. The comments just made by my colleague from Barrie South—Innisfil were interesting. We also heard the member for Kingston and the Islands across the way say the Liberals have not dropped a budget in 18 months and they still won the election.
Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK
Mr. Speaker, we always know what a Liberal is going to do. The Liberals are going to do the best thing for the Liberal Party of Canada, and when Canadians get hurt, it does not matter. We have seen it with their crime bills. They will support the criminals and support the Liberal Party, and try to protect their record, but not care about Canadians. We will see it in this motion too because we want Canadians to have food on their tables, and the Liberals do not care.
John Brassard Conservative Barrie South—Innisfil, ON
Mr. Speaker, I said it during my speech. I think the Prime Minister has come back to keep the kleptocracy alive. Those well-connected insiders, those advocates, those—
John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, you admonished me for my comments, and now we have a member demeaning a member of—
Opposition MotionBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I will remind the member that once a Speaker makes a ruling in the chamber, Standing Order 10 is very clear that we cannot go back and revisit that Speaker's ruling.
Members have a lot of space for debate, and what I have heard so far is debate.
The chief government whip, on a different point of order.
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, I believe the member was trying to reference a previous point of order in order to make the point he was making.
I think it is incumbent upon you and it is your duty, Mr. Speaker, as I am sure you would agree, to at least listen to his point of order before interjecting, unless you believe you have heard enough.