House of Commons Hansard #56 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was program.

Topics

line drawing of robot

This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives heavily criticize the Liberal government's economic mismanagement, pointing to record deficits, increased bureaucracy, and a cost of living crisis with rising grocery and baby formula prices. They condemn the Prime Minister's frequent international travel for failing to reduce tariffs, impacting Canadian exports. Concerns also include the cancellation of pipelines and the rise of extortion.
The Liberals defend their budget, emphasizing economic growth, market diversification, and aiming for the strongest economy in the G7. They highlight significant investments in social programs like dental care, the Canada Child Benefit, and school food. They also underscore commitments to clean energy, cultural funding, and affordable housing, while urging support for anti-extortion measures.
The Bloc criticizes the government's arts and culture funding, arguing it neglects private television and radio. They question the government's plans for private media and challenge a minister's views on a hypothetical Quebec currency and its implications.
The NDP criticizes the Liberal budget for eliminating the luxury tax on yachts and private jets, while cutting public services.

Petitions

Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act Report stage of Bill C-4. The bill proposes affordability measures for Canadians, including a tax cut for 22 million Canadians, a GST exemption for first-time homebuyers on new homes, and the removal of the consumer carbon price. While Liberals argue it supports a strong economy and other social programs, Conservatives contend the tax cuts are negated by increased government spending, leading to a broader affordability crisis. The Bloc Québécois supports housing measures but criticizes the carbon tax removal as an election stunt that withheld funds from Quebec. 16500 words, 2 hours.

Export and Import Permits Act Second reading of Bill C-233. The bill seeks to close a "U.S. loophole" in the Export and Import Permits Act, requiring permits and human rights assessments for all military exports, including to the United States. Proponents argue this aligns Canada with the Arms Trade Treaty, preventing complicity in war crimes. Opponents warn it would harm Canada's defence industry, jeopardize jobs, and disrupt vital alliances like NATO. 7500 words, 1 hour.

Adjournment Debates

Build Canada Homes bureaucracy Jacob Mantle criticizes the Build Canada Homes bureaucracy as ineffective for most Canadians. Jennifer McKelvie defends the program and other initiatives to increase affordability and housing supply, mentioning partnerships with builders and other levels of government. Mantle argues the average salary should buy the average home.
Federal budget and fiscal responsibility Tamara Jansen criticizes the government's overspending and its impact on Canadians, citing a warning from Fitch Ratings about a potential credit downgrade. Maggie Chi defends the government's budget as a generational plan that builds the economy and empowers Canadians through strategic investments and trade diversification.
Mental health funding parity Gord Johns says the Liberals are failing on mental health promises, pointing to the $200 billion cost of untreated issues. Maggie Chi cites investments like the youth mental health fund and suicide prevention. Johns asks for a strategy for men's mental health, and Chi says the government continues to engage with experts.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

4:55 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Mr. Speaker, in my region, the now Liberal riding of Thérèse-De Blainville has lost 300 jobs at Paccar. What was the Liberal member's response? On October 23, at 7:36 a.m., on Mario Dumont's show, she suggested that these workers call community organizations and food banks, that they come up with a plan A, B or C, that they not take it personally, that they find another job, that they go back to school and that they go work somewhere else.

The government members rise, but they do not understand that, as members of the opposition, we cannot find fault with all 500 pages of a budget. That is why we set priorities and why we are consistent and transparent. That is why we submitted our priorities in advance. Rather than acknowledging that, they lecture us, even though they were the ones who said no to Quebec and turned their backs on our people. They go through their little shopping list, while one of their own tells people to go back to school even though the government has abandoned them.

I invite my colleague to take a good look at his party and acknowledge that it does not defend the interests of Quebeckers.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Conservative

Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB

Mr. Speaker, it was an impressive speech by my hon. colleague.

The budget will mean a $78-billion deficit. This money is going to be borrowed against future generations, to be paid by Canadians for the longest time we can ever imagine.

What does the member think of the deficit? Should we go into a $78-billion deficit with a budget?

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Mr. Speaker, I think the federal government is borrowing money at Quebeckers' expense. If we look at the public debt of the average Quebecker, we see that the average Quebecker owes nearly twice as much in federal debt as in Quebec debt. That is Canada's legacy to Quebeckers.

Now, will it be $78 billion or $79 billion? I think it could be more, because the government told us that it would find a way to cut spending by $50 billion. It has identified $10 billion in cuts, and maybe only half of that will be feasible. We saw in the budget lock-up that public servants do not even know what the government's plans are. They should have already found $800 million to cut a month ago.

What worries me is the lack of transparency and planning and the fact that no one knows where we are going to be in three months' time with this government.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, Bloc members focus a lot of attention on the health care issue. During the nineties, there was a great debate inside the Manitoba legislature. What was raised, if not in the chamber, outside the chamber, was a tax-point shift that was agreed to with the provinces where cash was being replaced with tax points. That is one of the reasons the percentage is not as high as members opposite would maybe have liked to see. It was Jean Chrétien who established a guarantee in cash.

I am wondering if the member would not agree that having Canada contribute the cash, with record amounts of it today, is a positive thing for all of us.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North does not know what he is talking about. He is talking about the transfer levels, while we are taking about the discrepancy in the transfers. We are not talking about the level once tax points are taken into account; we are talking about the discrepancy. What we want the government to understand is that, if system costs increase by 6% but transfers only increase by 5%, the government is disengaging because of that discrepancy, regardless of the tax points or the level.

Maybe the Liberals should get their wages frozen for seven or eight years so they can understand what it feels like when the amount of money somebody receives does not grow at the same rate as the cost of living or the cost of providing services. We are not talking about the level of transfers, but the rate at which they increase. Starting with this year's amount, including tax points, if system costs increase by 6% and transfers increase by 5%, there will be a 1% difference that will build up over time, and that is very serious, whether my colleague is right or wrong about transfer levels and tax points.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Québec Centre.

Our new government was elected in the spring with a mandate to build a stronger, more resilient economy. We got straight to work from day one. I am thinking of all the investments we have made in housing and infrastructure that are going to stimulate the economy, the creation of the Major Projects Office or even the removal of interprovincial trade barriers. I am thinking of our buy Canadian policy, which will put the federal government's purchasing power to work for our businesses to once again stimulate our economy. I am thinking of all the agreements we are currently negotiating or have already signed with various countries around the world.

What is behind all this? In our desire to strengthen the Canadian economy, there is one principle that is very important to us: to ensure that the economy works for everyone. By making our economy stronger, we can fund measures that are important for making life more affordable for Canadians. Early in our mandate, we introduced Bill C-4 in the House, which includes three key measures that will have a real impact on people's lives.

First, we are proposing a tax cut for the middle class. The lowest tax bracket will have its tax rate reduced from 15% to 14%. This measure will benefit more than 22 million Canadians and will save each family up to $840. That means more money in people's pockets that they can use for the things that matter to them.

The second important item in Bill C-4 is the GST rebate on new homes valued at $1 million or less. We want to help Canadians become homeowners, whether they are young people, young families or long-time renters who want to get into the housing market and become homeowners. We want to help Canadians achieve this dream, and we want it to be affordable. That is why we are eliminating the GST on the purchase of a first home, on top of all the other housing measures we are putting in place. In budget 2025, we are investing over $13 billion through Build Canada Homes to stimulate housing construction across the country, including affordable housing. In addition to everything we are doing through Build Canada Homes, we hope that removing the GST on the purchase of a first home will provide a financial incentive to buy a home and encourage property developers to increase the stock of available homes nationwide.

Finally, in Bill C‑4, the government also announces that it is eliminating carbon pricing for consumers. When that was done on April 1, people very quickly saw prices drop at the pump, including in Madawaska—Restigouche, New Brunswick. It also had a tangible impact on heating costs in the Atlantic provinces, because many people there still use gas to heat their homes in the winter. I want to be clear: This in no way undermines our commitment to fighting climate change. Carbon pricing had unfortunately become a divisive and controversial policy. The fight against climate change is so important that we cannot afford to maintain a policy that overshadows all of our other climate efforts. One example I am thinking of is our climate competitiveness strategy, which was announced in the 2025 budget, as well as all the other measures we are putting in place.

What does this mean? It means that Bill C-4 is part of a series of measures that our government is implementing to help people cope with the rising cost of living. Budget 2025 includes several tangible measures. I am thinking of the fact that we have made Canada's national school food program permanent. This program ensures that children start their day with a full stomach. Children want to have a productive day at school and want to learn, but they cannot do it an empty stomach. We understand this, and we are here for children across the country. An agreement has been signed with the Province of New Brunswick to expand the school food program to many schools, including some in my riding. I am thinking in particular of the Marie-Gaétane school in Kedgwick, which I graduated from several years ago. It benefits from this program, and so do several other schools in my riding. This is an essential program that is having a tangible impact on our children's lives. In budget 2025, we are making it permanent. We have also announced the introduction of automatic federal benefits.

We saw that there was a problem. Many people need and are entitled to federal benefits like the Canada child benefit, the Canada disability benefit and GST rebates. However, some of these people were not accessing the benefits to which they were entitled because they did not file their tax returns. A new measure will be implemented for automatic tax filing for people with low incomes and simple tax situations. This is a concrete measure to ensure that the system guarantees that the people who need federal benefits the most can access them.

We also announced a tax credit for personal support workers worth up to 5% of their earnings or $1,100 per year. This is a concrete measure to help our personal support workers, who do essential work. These are the people who take care of our seniors. These are the people we call upon to take care of our parents and grandparents. They do essential work for Canadians, and we recognize that work. That is why, in budget 2025, we are proposing a tax credit to help them.

The Canada summer jobs program is another example. This program gives young people access to a job that could potentially help them pay for their education. The Canada summer jobs program often provides young people with their first work experience. In budget 2025, not only did we maintain funding for this program, we increased it. Last summer, I visited over 200 workplaces in my riding of Madawaska—Restigouche. I can attest to this program's importance to the young people in my riding. We are also proposing plenty of other measures to help young people get jobs. For example, through budget 2025, we are going to invest $300 million in the youth employment and skills strategy over the next two years.

It is very important to know that we made sure that budget 2025 would protect all the essential social programs that are helping Canadians cope with the cost of living. These include the Canada child benefit, which is received by more than six million parents across the country. This program transfers over $40 million to my constituents to meet their children's needs.

We recently learned that more than five million Canadians are now enrolled in the Canadian dental care plan. This plan is having a real impact. I remember someone in my riding who told me she had dental issues. She simply could not afford to go to the dentist, and this situation had been going on for years. Because eligibility was expanded to all age groups in May, this person was able to access much-needed affordable dental care this summer. This is yet another example of a concrete measure that is improving people's lives.

We have also maintained our national affordable child care program, which benefits more than 900,000 children. On this side of the House, we understand that a strong Canada requires strong families. We have also maintained the Canada disability benefit, which helps more than 465,000 people across the country. We are also continuing with the Canada workers benefit, which benefits more than three million people.

All the other investments we are making in infrastructure can also have spin-offs that will help make the cost of living more affordable. I would like to give a concrete example of an announcement that was recently made in my riding regarding public transit. Last week, I had the opportunity to announce, on behalf of the Minister of Infrastructure and Housing, an investment of more than $700,000 to expand public transit service in various communities in my riding of Madawaska—Restigouche. This will give people in Vallée‑des‑Rivières, Grand Falls, Saint‑Quentin, and Kedgwick access to flexible, affordable, high-quality public transit that is truly tailored to the needs of rural communities.

This is in addition to initial federal funding that made it possible to launch this service in the Edmundston region, in Madawaska. A person from Saint‑Quentin will be able to travel to Edmundston for only $5. This means seniors who do not have transportation will be able to visit their families or get to their medical appointments. Workers will be able to commute between their homes and their workplaces. Post-secondary students will be able to travel to the Edmundston campus of the Université de Moncton. This measure, this investment, will have a meaningful impact on the lives of families in Madawaska—Restigouche, as well as seniors, vulnerable individuals, and workers.

On this side of the House, when we talk about measures to help people cope with the cost of living, we follow up with concrete action. I look forward to voting in favour of Bill C-4 so it can pass and become law.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

Carol Anstey Conservative Long Range Mountains, NL

Mr. Speaker, I particularly listened when the member across the way talked about the carbon tax and all the conversation we heard about it prior to the election about how the carbon tax did not drive up the cost for Canadians and that, in fact, more money was going into their pockets.

I am curious if now the member is talking about how removing the carbon tax is driving the cost down, which we know is not really the case. Does he not now believe in the previous argument, or does he now agree the carbon tax did indeed drive up the cost of everything?

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out to my colleague that the fight against climate change is both a moral and economic imperative. It is important to have a variety of measures in place to reduce our carbon footprint.

As for consumer carbon pricing, it is important to note that there was a rebate system. Yes, people paid a little more at the pump, but there was a rebate. As I mentioned in my speech, this policy had become controversial. It no longer had widespread support.

The fight against climate change is so important. We need to build a greater consensus among Canadians to really ensure that we implement ambitious climate measures that are tailored to the challenges of the day.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Bloc

Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's comments, including his remark about the GST break on new homes. In my riding, however, the problem is that people are unable to save up enough money to buy a new home. Rents are rising and house prices keep going up, making the situation all the more difficult.

I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about our proposals for people who have not saved up a down payment yet. We have two proposals and both are simple. The first is to allow parents to use their RRSPs to help their children put together a down payment. The second is to offer interest-free government loans to help young people and new homebuyers with their down payment.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, the housing crisis is real. There is a shortage of housing across the country, including in my riding of Madawaska—Restigouche. When faced with a situation of this magnitude, the government must take action. Through the Build Canada Homes program, we will invest more than $13 billion to stimulate housing construction across the country. Evidently, significantly increasing the number of available homes could put downward pressure on prices. It is a matter of supply and demand.

Funds will also be set aside for affordable housing through Build Canada Homes. Thanks to federal funding, we have already seen a lot of construction of this type of housing in my riding, in cities such as Edmundston and Campbellton. I have no doubt that with the investments we are making with Build Canada Homes, we will see more and more construction projects across the country, including in my riding.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal Québec Centre, QC

Mr. Speaker, I was very impressed to hear my esteemed colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche say that last summer, he visited 200 places where people had found jobs through the Canada summer jobs program. I wish him good luck and lots of fun next summer, because the program is increasing the number of funded positions from 70,000 to 100,000.

What does he think about the impact this program is having on young people and community organizations in his riding?

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, the Canada summer jobs program is essential for our young people and for our small businesses and community organizations. Last summer, I visited day cares, summer camps, museums and festivals. I met people in public works and people who performed a variety of tasks. Without this program, their employers simply might not have been able to afford to hire them for the summer.

This provides our small businesses and community organizations with the tools they need and gives them access to a workforce during the summer. It also gives young people in our regions the opportunity to gain relevant work experience. Many of the young people I spoke with were gaining work experience for the first time. For others, it was experience related to their field of study. This program has a major impact.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my Liberal colleague across the way. The student jobs with the Canada summer jobs program are interesting. However, when the government cuts 40,000 positions from the public service, even through attrition and voluntary departures, that means 40,000 fewer positions for young people who want to enter the labour market and have good union jobs as well.

What does he think of that?

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, the various items will be carefully considered. We are definitely facing challenges right now. We had to invest in infrastructure, housing and all sorts of things.

We have allowed ourselves some flexibility. We are going to spend less so that we can invest more. We are going to invest over $300 million in the new youth employment strategy.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal Québec Centre, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Bill C-4, the making life more affordable for Canadians act.

The bill would enact three important measures designed to make life more affordable for Canadians at a time when a range of economic headwinds are combining to pose significant affordability challenges. First, we would cut taxes for 22 million Canadians; second, we would eliminate the GST for most first-time homebuyers for new homes; and third, we would cancel the consumer carbon price while keeping industrial pricing regimes in place and, in fact, reinforcing them so we can make life more affordable for Canadians while tackling the existential challenge of climate change.

In a rapidly changing and uncertain world, Canada's government is focused on what we can control. We are protecting our communities and our country, we are building our economy with major projects and millions more homes, and we are empowering Canadians with lower costs and new opportunities to help them get ahead. Bill C-4 is part of our government's plan to ensure that every Canadian has more control over building their own future.

Bill C-4 would lower taxes for 22 million Canadians. In practical terms, this means that the tax rate on the first personal income tax bracket would drop from 15% to 14%. In 2025, this first tax bracket applies to the first $57,375 of taxable income. For individuals whose taxable income is below that cut-off, their entire income tax will be reduced. The taxes of people whose income is above the cut-off will be reduced on the first $57,375. In total, this represents a tax reduction of up to $420 per taxpayer in 2026. For a family with two taxpayers, it would be up to $840.

After the bill was introduced, the Canada Revenue Agency updated its source deduction tables for the second half of the 2025 tax year. That means the reduced tax rate is already in effect for many Canadians. Let me remind the House that the tax cut specified in the bill came into effect on July 1.

Ultimately, because the one percentage point cut in the lowest tax rate would come into effect halfway through the year, the full-year tax rate for 2025 would be 14.5%, while the full-year rate for 2026 and future tax years would be 14%. However, for that to happen, Bill C-4 must be passed. This is important support for Canadians. It is a very good reason to vote in favour of the bill.

Another good reason to vote for Bill C-4 is a GST rebate that would help Canadians access the housing market. Under the law, the GST generally applies to the sale of new or substantially renovated housing. Bill C-4 would eliminate the GST, or the federal portion of the HST, for first-time homebuyers on a new home valued up to $1 million. It would also allow first-time homebuyers to reduce the amount of tax they pay on a new home valued between $1 million and $1.5 million.

The first-time homebuyers GST rebate included in Bill C-4 would save Canadians up to $50,000 on a new home. It would allow more young people and families to enter the housing market. Moreover, this measure could incentivize first-time homebuyers to buy newly built homes. In turn, this increased demand would encourage developers to build more homes, which would have a positive effect on housing supply. Expanding the housing stock is indeed key to addressing housing affordability.

Canada has been in the midst of housing crisis for several years now. Our government has a plan to double the pace of residential construction over the next decade. Any policy that can contribute to that is welcome. There are others, such as Build Canada Homes, which is investing in and will invest in the renovation and construction of many social and deeply affordable housing units across the country.

The third thing Bill C-4 would do would be to remove the consumer carbon price from law following its cancellation back in April.

Large emitters will still be subject to pollution pricing, as that is an important and central pillar of Canada's plan to build both a strong economy and a greener future. Industrial carbon pricing systems encourage investment in technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our government has been very clear. Pollution pricing for large emitters will remain a key part of our plan to build a strong economy and a greener economy.

In conclusion, the bill proposes three clear measures that will help Canadians in very concrete ways. First, there is a tax cut that will put more money in the pockets of Canadian workers, up to $420 per taxpayer and up to $840 for a family of two, impacting 22 million taxpayers across the country. Second, there is a GST rebate for first-time homebuyers purchasing a new home. This represents savings of up to $50,000 on the initial cost of purchasing a new home to help first-time buyers and young people in particular enter the housing market. Third, there is the removal of consumer carbon pricing from law.

I urge all members of the House to vote in favour of this bill.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jonathan Rowe Conservative Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL

Mr. Speaker, I am curious. The Liberal Party seems to be very excited about giving tax cuts and making things more affordable for Canadians. I wonder why it took the luxury tax off luxury vehicles but continues to keep the HST and GST on health care services such as massage therapy.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal Québec Centre, QC

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the new member and obviously commend his important work. However, I would warn him about the things that previous members of the Conservative Party have done over the last few years.

The first thing Conservative MPs did in 2016 was vote against the middle-income tax cut at that time. Another thing that other Conservative MPs did, just a few years later, was to again vote against a middle-income tax cut. That was around 2020 or 2021. Therefore, I invite him to consider very carefully how he will vote on Bill C-4 so that future Conservative MPs can base their future votes on his soon-to-be-known behaviour.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Bloc

Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is proud to talk about eliminating carbon pricing. I would remind the House that this was one of the marquee policies of this government, which boasted that 80% of people were receiving more money than they paid. The government scrapped it without putting any other measures in place.

Here is what interests me as a member from Quebec. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the fact that Quebec has its own system and that the federal government took $814 million out of Quebeckers' pockets to send vote-buying cheques to Canadians during the election campaign.

As a member from Quebec, does he agree with this decision to steal $814 million directly out of Quebeckers' pockets to send vote-buying cheques?

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal Québec Centre, QC

Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend knows very well what has taken place over the past few months. A payment was promised to all Canadians in the provinces that participated in the consumer carbon pricing regime, which did not apply to Quebec or British Columbia. The regime no longer exists. Therefore, the rebate does not exist either.

That has been very well understood, I think, by everyone who has been following the situation over the past few months.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Steeve Lavoie Liberal Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Mr. Speaker, I know that as soon as he gets a chance, my colleague will travel around in his riding and speak with his constituents.

I have a two-part question.

First, what are people saying about all the programs he talked about? Second, in his view, what does the Leader of the Opposition think about the measures that we want to bring in for Canadians?

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal Québec Centre, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Beauport—Limoilou, who is now a Liberal member from the greater Quebec City area and who has increased the number of Liberal members from the greater Quebec City area by 50%.

It is not complicated. The Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois voted against the Canadian dental care plan and the Canada child benefit. On top of that, the Conservatives called the national school food plan wasteful and trash. They also voted against child care.

These are examples of measures that are very important to the people in my riding, and it is unfortunate to have to repeat once again that the Conservative members have systematically opposed them.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Carol Anstey Conservative Long Range Mountains, NL

Mr. Speaker, I have a question about the first-time homebuyer tax credit the Liberals are offering, which Conservatives loved because it was a part of our platform.

I am in the housing market. That is my background. I am wondering if the Liberals have given any thought, considering the cost of housing, as to how many young people this is actually going to help with getting into the housing market given the high price of construction in the current market.

Bill C-4 Making Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal Québec Centre, QC

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's input, which suggests that she will vote in favour of Bill C-4 because she seems to be supporting the removal of GST on the purchase of new homes for first-time homebuyers. That is excellent news.

We look forward to confirming that vote soon in the House. It is great that she supports the measure, and we look forward to seeing that in the House through her vote.

Bill C-233 Export and Import Permits ActPrivate Members' Business

November 19th, 2025 / 5:30 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

moved that Bill C-233, An Act to amend the Export and Import Permits Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, for seconding this important bill.

It is with both a heavy heart and a deep sense of purpose that I rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-233, an act to amend the Export and Import Permits Act, or what many civil society organizations have been calling the no more loopholes act, legislation that seeks to finally bring Canada's arms export regime into full compliance with the Arms Trade Treaty.

The bill is about something far larger than policy or procedure. It is about whether we, as a nation, will choose to be builders of peace or merchants of war. It is about whether Canadian-made weapons, the products of our factories, our labour and our infrastructure, will continue to fuel the killing of innocent civilians abroad.

We cannot claim to be one thing on the world stage, a supporter of human rights, while turning a wilfully blind eye to what we are doing by maintaining this giant loophole. Canadians expect and deserve better.

Let me emphasize first and foremost that the legislation is not partisan. It should never be partisan. Every member of the House, regardless of political stripe, must ask themselves whether we want Canadian-made arms to be used to commit war crimes. Do we want our export laws to continue to contain loopholes so large that bombs and munitions slip through them? Do we want Canada's name to be associated with genocide and human suffering? The bill is our opportunity to say no, clearly, unequivocally and finally.

Canada acceded to the Arms Trade Treaty in 2019. The government did so with great fanfare, promising to uphold the highest standards of transparency, accountability and peace. Bill C-47 passed to amend the Export and Import Permits Act, establishing a new framework for arms brokering and export controls.

At the time, Canadians were told that our government was committed to ensuring that our weapons would never contribute to human rights abuses, that we were joining the world in saying never again to atrocities fuelled by the global arms trade. What we were not told, and what Canadians are now only beginning to understand, is that the 2019 amendments left open a gaping loophole, a loophole that has since become a giant and open back door for weapons, components and explosives to flow freely from Canada to the United States and then onward to some of the most brutal conflicts in the world.

The U.S. loophole is indeed the heart of the problem. Canada never adopted article 4, which required Canada to treat weapons, parts and components with the same scrutiny as full weapons systems. Canada also left out article 6, which clearly prohibits arms transfers where there is a serious risk that they will be used in genocide or war crimes. By omitting these articles, it means that, under section 7 of the Export and Import Permits Act, the lion's share of exports to the United States are exempt from the permit reporting and human rights risk assessment requirements that apply to every other country.

That means that Canadian-made weapons, explosives and parts can cross into the United States completely unmonitored, with no transparency and no public record. Once they arrive in the U.S., those components are often integrated into larger weapons systems, F-35 fighter jets, Apache helicopters and heavy munitions, and then exported to countries such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and Sudan, where they have been used to devastate civilian populations.

In fact, in 2009, under the Harper administration, General Dynamics Land Systems, a Canadian company, provided 724 light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. These light armoured vehicles were seen being used in Saudi Arabia's operations in Yemen for years, where hundreds of thousands of Yemenis were killed.

In 2014, under another contract, Canada supplied a newer make of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. In 2015, that continued under the Trudeau administration. This is not speculation; this is not hyperbole. This is fact, documented in commercial export data, defence contracts and investigative journalism.

A recent report by Arms Embargo Now uncovered that hundreds of shipments of Canadian military goods are directly contributing to atrocities abroad. Between April 2004 and August 2025 alone, 34 shipments of Canadian-made aircraft components went to Lockheed Martin in the United States. Later, those same components were transferred to the Israeli Ministry of Defense and Israeli weapons manufacturers. Another 360 shipments of Canadian aircraft parts went to the F-35 assembly facility in Fort Worth, Texas. These are the same F-35s that have been dropping bombs on Gaza. Meanwhile, 150 shipments of explosives from Quebec went to U.S. ammunition plants, producing 2,000 pounds of bombs and artillery shells exported to Israel.

This is not indirect complicity. This is active participation in a deadly supply chain. Let us be clear about what that means. When Canadian-made components end up in weapons that kill civilians in Gaza, when our explosives are part of the bombs that are dropped on hospitals and apartment buildings, Canadians bear responsibility. When weapons bearing the logo of a Canadian arms manufacturer have been documented in the hands of paramilitary groups in Sudan, groups accused of massacring civilians and committing ethnic cleansing, Canada is complicit.

The United Nations and human rights observers have warned repeatedly that the flow of arms, including those traced back to Canada, has fuelled one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world. We cannot continue to hide behind bureaucratic language or the convenient fiction that what leaves Canada for the United States stays in the U.S. It does not, and we all know it.

The government has tried to reassure Canadians. The former foreign affairs minister said that no Canadian “arms or parts of arms” were sent to Gaza. Her successor, the current foreign affairs minister, said that Canada would “not allow Canadian-made weapons to fuel this conflict in any way”. Those words ring hollow when confronted with the evidence.

The government has done nothing to close the U.S. loophole, nothing to stop the use of Canadian-made weapons or components in the bombardment of Gaza, nothing to ensure compliance with the Arms Trade Treaty. By exempting U.S.-bound exports from oversight, Canada is violating not just the spirit but the letter of the Arms Trade Treaty. Article 5 of the treaty requires all state parties to regulate arms transfers in a consistent, objective and non-discriminatory manner. Article 6 prohibits transfers that would contribute to genocide, crimes against humanity or serious violations of the Geneva Conventions. Article 7 requires each state to assess the risk of exported weapons being used to commit such acts.

When the government issued general export permit no. 47 in 2019, allowing the full export of full-system conventional arms to the U.S. without permits or risk assessments, it undermined the very treaty we acceded to. That was why we need to pass Bill C-233, to end such blanket exemptions, so that Canada can finally live up to the promises we made to the world and to ourselves.

Bill C-233, the “no more loopholes act”, will close the U.S. export loophole requiring permits and human rights assessments for all military goods, regardless of destination; end the issuance of general export of brokering permits that bypass case-by-case review; ensure full transparency and public reporting of all military exports, including those to the U.S.; and reinforce Canada's compliance with the Arms Trade Treaty and restore integrity to our export regime.

A few weeks ago, I received a leaked document of the Liberals' talking points to counter my private member's bill. The Liberals say that Bill C-233 is misguided. They say this bill would decimate Canada's defence industry, that it would create unnecessary delays and potentially block Canada-made materials and equipment from getting to our allies in Europe like Ukraine, and that it would weaken Canada's role in NATO. Let me address each one of these points head-on.

First, living up to Canada's commitments to the Arms Trade Treaty is not misguided. It demonstrates the integrity and trustworthiness of a nation.

Second, the bill would not decimate the defence industry. It would simply require that all exports, including those going to the United States, meet the same human rights and risk assessment standards that we already apply to every other destination. If a country is already compliant with the Arms Trade Treaty, it has nothing to worry about. Canada's defence system will not be put in jeopardy, as Canada is reliant on imports of military goods going to Canada, not exports.

Third, this bill would not disrupt NATO or delay aid to Ukraine. Not only is there no evidence that it would delay or potentially block Canada's military aid to Ukraine, but the vast majority of the aid to Ukraine is sent either directly to Ukraine or to European allies. This bill seeks to standardize the regulatory process for arms exports going to the U.S. In addition, transfers of military aid, including for Ukraine, are handled by the Department of National Defence, not the export permitting process overseen by Global Affairs.

Fourth, harmonizing export controls with our European allies strengthens, not weakens, NATO. Of the 32 NATO members, 30 are state parties to the Arms Trade Treaty. The two states that are signatories to the Arms Trade Treaty but have not acceded to the treaty, are Turkey and the U.S. Passing Bill C-233 would, in fact, bring Canada into alignment with the vast majority of our allies, not out of step with them.

Some have bizarrely claimed that more transparency would compromise our sovereignty. Transparency is not a threat to sovereignty; it is its foundation. A sovereign nation should be able to stand before the world and say with confidence that its weapons are not being used to kill innocent civilians. This is not weakness; this is actually strength.

While I acknowledge that Canada's defence industry contributes to our economy, that economic benefit cannot come at the expense of human lives. Our message to the defence industry is clear: If exports are compliant with international law, business can continue; if exports risk enabling war crimes, then they must stop. We cannot and must not build prosperity on the backs of human suffering.

This is ultimately a test of our integrity, particularly at a time when there will be unprecedented defence spending with a commitment of $81.8 billion in budget 2025, far exceeding the 2% NATO commitment the Prime Minister made during the campaign. We cannot continue to call for peace while profiting from war crimes, and we cannot condemn atrocities abroad while quietly enabling them through our exports.

Canada once led the world in peacekeeping. We once stood proudly as a voice of conscience on the global stage. However, today, our moral standing is being eroded, not by what we say but by what we permit. As we debate this bill, the bombs are still falling on Gaza. Families are still being buried beneath rubble. Children are dying in hospitals that are running out of fuel and medicine. Somewhere in the chain of destruction, there are Canadian-made parts, like propellants and circuitry, that help make these weapons possible. That must end.

History will judge us not by how we defended industries or alliances, but by whether we defended humanity. Bill C-233 is about closing the loopholes, yes, but it is also about opening our eyes. It is about aligning our laws with our values, our words, our deeds, our actions and our conscience, with no more exceptions, no more excuses and no more Canadian complicity in war crimes.

To my colleagues in this House, if we truly believe in human rights, in the rule of law and in peace, then we must support this bill. When the crime is the killing of innocent civilians, there can be no loopholes, no silence, no culture of impunity, no looking away, no wilful ignorance and no moral blindness.

Canadians will be watching how each member votes, and it will be recorded in Hansard forever. They want Canada to be a force for peace. It is time for us to live up to that promise.

Bill C-233 Export and Import Permits ActPrivate Members' Business

5:45 p.m.

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for contributing to the debate by raising these points. I am going to talk about this later, because I will be giving a speech on the topic, so I will not delve into it too deeply right now.

However, let us consider a hypothetical scenario, because I want to make sure I understand all the details. Daesh, in Iraq and Syria, has often stored arms or ammunition in hospitals, schools and mosques on the assumption that the Global Coalition Against Daesh would not dare attack such places. I want to make sure I understand correctly.

If the coalition were to attack such locations, which are in fact places where terrorists store arms, would export permits necessarily be suspended?

Could Canada continue to export to such countries?