Debates of Nov. 25th, 2025

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I think that the member's view of what is actually happening on the ground in Canada is the exact opposite. Food bank usage is at its highest it has ever been. Millions of people are lining up for the food bank, many of whom are going for the first time.

Unfortunately the government seems to be taking pride in the fact that it is creating programs that supply food. I am old enough to remember when it was the individual's responsibility to go to work, create an income, buy their own food and find a place to live in a safe neighbourhood. All of that has been eviscerated, so I guess wonder whether, if the situation continues, the government will be creating an adult food program.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with this. This budget will help 400,000 children with a food program. It will also help seniors and those of all ages with a dental care plan. It will help build major infrastructure and homes and will build industries that grow our economy and create lasting prosperity. I think this budget will put Canada in a good fiscal position and will build a strong Canada.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is something extremely dangerous about this budget. I invite my colleague to turn to page 301. She will see that the government is being allowed to circumvent all laws, except the Criminal Code, in order to push forward projects disguised as innovation.

Here in Parliament, we make the laws. However, now those laws can be circumvented if a minister comes along and says he has a good project. There is no need for assessments. There is no need to follow the laws. The government is giving itself the power to override any law.

I would like a clear explanation from my colleague. If this is not an open door to patronage and a serious departure from democracy, then what is it?

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to give the example of a project in Montreal that is strengthening our supply chain, diversifying our trade and creating thousands of jobs in Quebec. The project will generate approximately $140 million annually in local and economic benefits in Quebec and across Canada.

This budget is a very good budget. Not only will it make my community strong, but it will also make our country strong.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, public safety is an important issue for my colleague's riding, and in the budget we are making important investments to strengthen public safety. Since we formed government last spring, we have put forward many pieces of legislation regarding public safety. I would like to hear the member's views on how those investments are going to benefit her riding.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, public safety is the top priority in my community. As I said in my speech, safety is the top priority for families. Budget 2025 delivers real action to crack down on auto theft, home invasion and organized crime. This budget invests $1.7 billion over four years in the RCMP, including 1,000 new personnel and recruitment incentives to strengthen investigation and support local police across the country. This is built on our government's recent bail and sentencing reform act, which would tighten bail for repeat violent offenders and strengthen sentencing. Together, these measures would give law enforcement stronger tools and would ensure that communities like Brampton have the support they need to stay safe.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canada is a nation built on ordinary people doing extraordinary things. It was the prairie farmers who turned barren land into the world's greatest breadbasket. It was the workers who carved a national railway through mountains so grand that they seemed immovable. It was the veterans who fought tyranny overseas and then returned home to build communities here in this nation, and it was, as it continues to be, the inventors, builders, entrepreneurs and newcomers who used their skills, their hands and their knowledge to build Canada and make us a nation that is admired around the world.

At every turning point in our history, it was the determination, creativity and grit of the people that spurred us forward, and today, despite the heavy burdens on them, Canadians remain our greatest source of hope. They want to build. They want to contribute. They want to provide for their families and to see our communities thrive. They do not want and they do not need yet another government handout.

The hon. member just gave an entire speech for 10 minutes outlining program after program. There is nothing empowering about that. Canadians want to be effective on their own. They need a government that trusts them. They need a government that removes barriers and unleashes their potential. In other words, they need a government that facilitates opportunity and empowers them to do great things. That is what Canadians want.

Unfortunately, that is not what this budget delivered. Instead, budget 2025 was all but that. It really was a chance, the government's opportunity, to put trust in the Canadian people to launch them forward and help them succeed by simply facilitating an environment of economic prosperity rather than laying out program after program, which makes Canadians small and the government big. It is insulting, and Canadians are tired of it.

I will give an example. In question period, we have been asking about affordability. Recently, the Secretary of State for Children and Youth said that if a senior is struggling to afford food or a parent is struggling to pay for baby formula, the Liberals have an answer for them: the school food program. We can just sign those seniors up and get those babies in the school food program. With regard to rent and mortgages, this is what the Minister of Jobs and Families had to say: Those having a hard time putting a roof over their head should not worry; there is a national dental care program.

If these suggestions sound ludicrous, it is because they are. They are absolutely ludicrous, because the problem for someone who is having a hard time putting a roof over their head is not going to the dentist and getting a teeth cleaning. The problem for a family that cannot afford to buy baby formula is not signing their infant up for a school feeding program. In what world does a sophisticated government offer such solutions? I guess it is in Canada. I would remove the word “sophisticated”, however.

Canadians do not want another handout. They do not want another program. They want more freedom. They want more opportunity. They want their hard-earned money left in their pockets so they have choice, so they have dignity and so they can advance themselves and their families. That is what the government fails to see.

In my area, small businesses are the lifeblood of the community, but they are suffocating under inflation, taxation and over-regulation by the government. After years of overspending and mismanagement, the Liberal government has created an affordability crisis that Canadians from coast to coast are experiencing. When government takes on debt, and I mean 80 billion dollars' worth of debt, as in the budget, it is simply passed on to Canadians through increased taxation and increased inflation. It is Canadians who ultimately bear that. It is one of the most unkind things that the government could have possibly done to Canadians. It is cruel.

Many people ask what we would do differently as Conservatives. Let me begin with the fundamentals. Fundamentally, we believe in people. We believe they are the creators, innovators and problem solvers who will take this nation forward. We believe they are capable, resilient and ready to build a stronger country, if the government would simply get out of the way and allow them to succeed.

A Conservative government would chart a different course, one that brings home powerful paycheques by cutting waste, lowering taxes and restoring fiscal responsibility. We would reduce the debt load that is burdening Canadians. We would reward municipalities that build homes. We would enforce housing targets and we would lower construction costs. In short, we would restore hope because we believe in the Canadian people.

On that note, Canadians are not just looking for hope when it comes to affordability; they are also desperate for hope when it comes to their safety and their well-being. Again, the government is found lacking.

Violent crime is up, extortion is up, sexual assaults are up and gun crime is up. Crimes against children are out of this world, with a rate that is unprecedented. Repeat offenders are cycling in and out of jail. The member opposite scoffs as if it is not true, but he knows it is.

[An hon. member]

Who scoffed?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if only he would listen to a few of his constituents.

This is because of broken laws from the government. Criminals are being let out on the streets after serving only a fraction of their time, and sometimes their time for heinous crimes such as assault is spent in their living room, not even behind bars, thanks to the Liberal government's lackadaisical laws. Conservatives would end these policies. We would end catch-and-release. We would restore jail time for criminals. Across the country, for crying out loud, we would put victims ahead of people who commit crimes.

In my riding, we are not exempt. I have sat down with parents who have lost children to crime. I have sat down with children who have lost parents to crime. This is real in this country, and it is having a devastating effect.

Children's advocacy centres are doing incredible work, but they are insufficiently funded. There is something the government could have made an investment in but instead turned a cold shoulder to. Victims' services received cutbacks. The RCMP received cutbacks. Laws have become weaker. Criminals are being favoured. Why does the government so fundamentally believe that anyone but the victim should be stood up for?

We will continue the good fight. Many justice bills have been put forward from this side of the House calling for greater severity when it comes to heinous crimes and advocating for victims. My own private member's bill is one of them. It called for justice for sexual assault crimes and stood up for victims, making sure they receive what is theirs. We will continue that good fight.

Speaking of fight, we are pleased to see that in this budget implementation act, the government adds a clause to the Broadcasting Act to protect privacy. That is a good job. Sadly, however, Bill C-11 is a horrendous bill, so I must take this opportunity to talk about it.

It is the worst censorship legislation this country has ever seen. It likens us to places like North Korea, China and Turkey, places we would never want to become, because it controls what people can see, say and post online. It puts the government in control of how people use the Internet.

Fortunately, the Liberals have wracked themselves up in this legislation so horrendously that they have taken over two years to figure out how to implement it. Even though it passed in June 2023, it is actually still not in effect because it is such a terrible bill that they do not know what to do with it. The CRTC is confused. Court cases are happening because it is so badly blundered. I celebrate that personally because at the end of the day, it is Canadians who benefit. Bill C-11 should be scrapped altogether. The protection of Canadians' freedoms should be in place.

Budget 2025 shows Canadians exactly what the government truly is. They are the same old Liberals with the same old habits of overspending, overreaching and underdelivering. It is a horrendous budget that would do an incredible disservice to Canadians, and I will be proudly voting no.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member talked about believing in people. She talked about the importance of the creativity of our ancestors when they came to the country and about how they created this country. I agree with all of that, but what does she think of the fact that our budget would provide $1.7 billion for a suite of recruitment measures to recruit top-level scientists, innovators and doctors to our country? Is that a good idea, or is that, too, as she would say, ludicrous spending?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the devil is always in the details, is it not? Doctors will come if they are respected. They are respected when regulations are put in place that respect them.

If we want to draw investment into the country, there are two big things that keep it out: taxation and regulation. The government did not need to put Canadians into debt in order to bring investment into our country. In fact, I do not actually believe its program will work.

What the government needed to do was actually cut red tape and cut back on taxes. Investment will flow when those two things happen.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the budget relies on record spending, record debt and record optimism but absolutely no record of competence.

Given that the government cannot keep a single promise on deficits or timelines, does my colleague think that Canadians should believe a single number in the budget?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague asks a good question. Can we trust the government? When the government leads people to believe one thing but then does another, trust is broken. When the government puts Canadians further and further into debt, it results in inflation, increased taxation and cutbacks to social programs. When a government functions in that capacity, of course, trust is broken.

When a government overreaches and tries to control the Canadian people rather than believing in their potential, trust is broken. All in all, the government has functioned in such a way that Canadians really have no reason to trust it.

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

Mr. Speaker, we will note that the far right is alive and well in the Conservative Party. The member's speech reminds me of Joe Clark when he said that he never left the party; the party left him.

We can take a look at this particular budget. This was interesting. We actually had the Premier of Ontario, on CTV, welcoming the passage of the federal budget. He is reported to have said that no matter whether members are Conservative, NDP or Liberal, they should pass it.

I am wondering whether the member feels confident that her entire caucus has shifted as far right as she has. Does she believe that the Conservative Party is behind her, in solidarity, as one?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if it is far right to believe in the Canadian people, their potential and their ability to achieve greatness, I guess the label fits.

It is shameful that the member opposite does not believe the same. It grieves me that the member opposite does not believe in the Canadian people, does not believe in their potential, does not believe in their ability to achieve great things. It is shameful that the member opposite would somehow try to shame me for believing those things as if it were wrong to view Canadians as the creators, innovators and problem-solvers who can actually get us to good places as a country. It is shameful—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for La Pointe-de-l'Île.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was told earlier that I am not a Conservative. That said, I can confirm one thing for my colleague. Some people say that the Conservatives are not as interested in centralization as the Liberals are.

We saw an example of centralization in housing. We asked for the funds to be transferred to the Quebec government, with no strings attached, but the federal government is centralizing things even more with its Build Canada Homes program.

What does my colleague think about that?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, what we have to account for is this: We have a government that does not believe in the Canadian people, past, present or future, as revealed by the member's question today. He is scolding me for holding those beliefs and for celebrating the nation I love. That is shameful.

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I believe in Canada, in Canadians, in our industries and in the budget. This budget positions us for the future and meets this moment. It protects Canada's sovereignty and safety, and it meets our global commitments. It is protecting and growing our economy. It is meeting our climate goals. It is building major projects, community infrastructure and homes. It is protecting important services and making life more affordable for Canadians.

More than 75% of our actions this year are to respond to significant global economic shifts. Protecting Canada's sovereignty and meeting our global commitments are critical. Canadian defence experts are very clear: There are several pressing challenges facing Canada, including immediate threats in the Arctic. As the assistant deputy minister Wendy Hadwen told the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, “it's not peace time.”

We must meet Canada's 2% NATO commitment, and we must protect ourselves here at home. That is why we are making the largest investment in Canadian defence and security in decades, providing nearly $82 billion over five years to position our Canadian Armed Forces for success in an increasingly challenging environment.

At home, we are securing our borders and ensuring community safety by hiring 1,000 new RCMP officers and hiring 1,000 new CBSA officers. That defence spending is more than security; it is creating jobs for Canadian workers through our defence industrial strategy. It is catalyzing economic growth and innovation. It is strengthening our collective resilience and increasing the capacity and competitiveness of Canadian suppliers. This contributes to protecting Canada's economy.

Let us be very clear: We are in a trade war. Our largest trading partner is openly attacking key industries. It is creating a lot of uncertainty, and it is tough on Guelph families, where one in five families relies directly on a manufacturing job. We are the fourth-highest exporter to the U.S. per capita and one of the cities in Canada that are most vulnerable to tariffs. This government cares about those families. I do too. That is why I sit on the industry committee and chair the auto caucus.

Budget 2025 would help protect what we have. It helps us chart a course, a more resilient path forward, with $5 billion in supports for affected sectors to save jobs and industries, as well as the regional tariff response initiative to support tariff-affected businesses of all sizes in all affected sectors. Many Guelph businesses have already applied.

There is funding for expanding EI and work-share programs, with benefits and eligibility enhanced to provide additional support if people need it. It is true that Canadians would rather have a great job than expanded EI, but it is there if they need it, and so too is a new re-skilling package for up to 50,000 workers.

However, the key to more great jobs is to help Canadian businesses invest at home and attract foreign investment. We believe in Canadian business, so budget 2025 would introduce the productivity superdeduction, a new tax incentive to help businesses write off a larger share of capital investments immediately, making it easier to invest in machinery, technology, growth and clean tech. This 100% first-year writeoff for manufacturing or processing machinery and equipment is essential for Guelph manufacturers and food processors. They can immediately expense clean energy generation and energy conservation equipment, as well as zero-emission vehicles. This is great for our climate commitment and good for businesses to reduce their costs.

The productivity superdeduction brings Canada's effective tax rate to 5% lower than that of the U.S. and 12% lower than the G7 average. It gives our manufacturers and processors an exceptional advantage. The accelerated depreciation was a recommendation I heard when I held business round tables, and we heard it at the industry committee during our study on productivity.

To support those innovative businesses, budget 2025 also introduces the expansion and acceleration of the scientific research and experimental development tax credit, or SR&ED. It also opens more procurement pathways for small and medium-sized businesses, which constitute 98% of all employers in Canada.

This growth and innovation can be green. That is why we are also launching Canada's new climate competitive strategy. With clean economy investment tax credits, we can supercharge affordable net-zero energy projects, turning Canada's natural wealth into lasting prosperity while protecting the planet.

We are delivering the clean electricity investment tax credit to expand our clean power grid. We are enhancing tax credits for clean technologies, clean-tech manufacturing and carbon capture. We will also finalize enhanced methane regulations for the oil and gas sector and for landfills, update clean fuel regulations and mobilize capital for the transition to net zero through sustainable finance tools. These steps will cut emissions faster and give Canadian companies the certainty they need to invest in clean tech.

We can see the climate commitment through Canada's major projects, such as the wind west Atlantic energy project and the much-anticipated Alto high-speed rail from Toronto to Quebec City, which was a priority for Guelph's active transportation advocates at an event I attended earlier this fall.

Closer to home, budget 2025 would build homes and vital infrastructure, with an investment of $13 billion over five years. It will attract investment, focus on innovative construction. This could double the speed of construction, reduce costs and lower emissions. It will protect existing affordable housing through the Canada rental protection fund. It will provide $1 billion for transitional and supportive housing for people who are homeless and at risk of homelessness.

We have already met with supportive housing providers, such as Kendal, Wyndham House, the Guelph Community Health Centre, Stonehenge and Stepping Stone, and with the co-op housing sector to talk about opportunities. Guelph has very strong leadership in supportive housing and will no doubt have great projects to come.

Budget 2025 is about building stronger communities. As a former city councillor, I know how essential infrastructure is, and I know what that infrastructure backlog looks like, at least in Ontario. First, budget 2025 proposes $17 billion over 10 years to support provincial and territorial infrastructure projects and priorities. Second, and of vast interest nationally, $5 billion of that would go to a health infrastructure fund to help provinces and territories build and upgrade hospitals, emergency rooms, urgent care facilities and medical schools. Canadians have been asking for this. Third, we would create a direct delivery stream, with $6 billion over 10 years to support regionally significant projects, large building retrofits, climate adaptation and community infrastructure.

The Canada community-building fund will also provide nearly $28 billion over 10 years and $3 billion per year, ongoing, to support local infrastructure projects that make neighbourhoods vibrant and livable. I am already taking a lot of calls on that funding.

Members may ask, who is going to build these major projects, homes and infrastructure? We are investing in people, with $75 million over three years to expand a union training and innovation program, while creating workforce alliances to bring together employers, unions and industry groups. We are going to recognize international credentials faster. We are investing to attract the best talent in the world to our universities. We are investing in Canada summer jobs, the youth employment and skills strategy, the student work placement program and the youth climate corps. We are staying true to our values of being there for one another when times are tough.

The morning after the budget, I heard an economist on The Morning Edition describe the budget. He said that the language is honest and stark. He added that it is changing the direction of the ship without throwing anybody off. That is a brilliant analogy.

Budget 2025 would protect all the essential services that people rely on. We are adding the school nutrition program. We are making it permanent. We are cutting income taxes by 1%, eliminating the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes under $1 million. It is ambitious; it is leadership, and we have the wherewithal to do it.

Budget 2025 is more than a fiscal plan. It is a blueprint for Canada to meet this moment. If members believe that we need to meet our NATO commitments and properly fund our military; that we have to protect our industries and support our workers during this trade war; that we need to boost productivity, attraction, growth and retention of Canadian business; that we need clean energy; that we need to do something about housing availability and affordability; that we urgently need more tradespeople; and that we need to protect our social programs, then they must support this budget. We are protecting our country, our economy, our planet and our people.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Before I go to questions and comments, I just want to remind members that Standing Order 16(2) still applies. Members should not cross between the member who is speaking and the Chair. There was a member who just did that.

Questions and comments, the hon. member from Middlesex—London.

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we continue to hear from the Liberals that this is a generational investment, but my constituents in Middlesex—London say they see it as generational debt.

I would ask the member opposite what she would like to say to those young people out there, the university students, the college students, the apprentices, those who are still in training, who cannot afford to pay rent, who are still stuck in their parents' basement, as well as to the parents whose 28- and 26-year-olds are still living at home.

Could the member look them in the eye and tell them why it is okay to have generational debt? What is she going to do to give them hope for a better future in this country?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would tell them to ask Doug Ford why he cut rent control. I would tell them that we are investing heavily in trades and supporting them, that we are investing in Canadian business, that we are retaining and growing important industries, and that we are going to invest in a green, clean planet for them.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the various strategies for trying to buy votes.

In the last election, the Liberals provided compensation for the carbon tax for a period in which Canadians did not have to pay that tax at all. The Liberals did not provide compensation in Quebec and British Columbia, saying that those provinces did not pay any carbon tax. However, there was no carbon tax during the period targeted by the government's measure. Quebec was deprived of $814 million.

What does my colleague think about that?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would say that nothing of the kind happened.

When Guelph's constituents voted, they voted for a Prime Minister with a global reputation who had an exciting plan, a plan to finally invest in Canadians. People were feeling really optimistic.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I know tariffs have really affected the auto sector in the member's riding. In my riding, tariffs have really affected the forestry industry. She talked specifically about the regional tariff response initiative and how businesses and employees in her riding had benefited from this.

Can the member give us some more specific examples of how that has benefited people in her riding?