Debates of Nov. 27th, 2025

International Trade

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that member did not answer the question, so I am going to ask it again. The Prime Minister caved on countertariffs, on digital services taxes and on legal disputes about softwood lumber. We thought he was getting nothing for Canadians, but it turns out he was getting lots for his company, Brookfield. Days after he was in the White House, the Americans signed an $80-billion nuclear reactor deal with Brookfield.

Why is it that everywhere the Prime Minister goes, Brookfield gets a sweet deal and Canadians get no deal? Why?

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, speaking about trade, Canadians know that two-thirds of our economy is powered by trade. We are opening doors for Canadian products to reach new global markets. We signed new trade deals with Ecuador and Indonesia, and an investment agreement with the U.A.E., securing a $70-billion commitment for more investments in Canada.

That is what this government is focused on: opening new doors and more opportunities for Canadian workers and businesses.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, can the Prime Minister explain to Canadians why every time we ask about a conflict of interest with Brookfield, his answer is basically, who cares, nothing to see here, and just ignore the fact that he used to run the place. Canadians are starting to wonder: If Brookfield were any closer to the government, would it need a visitor's pass or just a set of cabinet keys?

How can Canadians trust that decisions are not being made in a boardroom instead of the House of Commons, or is the Liberal government now offering loyalty points for conflict of interest?

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians made a decision on April 28 between two visions for this country: a vision of hope and a vision of leadership versus slogans and division. Our Prime Minister is a world economic and business leader. He has travelled the world building up relationships and signing deals to build our economy, something that leader has never worked a day in.

Indigenous Affairs

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House, we know meaningful consultation with indigenous rights holders is essential to protecting rights, supporting sustainable development and building respectful long-term relationships.

Could the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations share how early and ongoing engagement with indigenous communities is helping improve our federal approach to consultation?

[Rebecca Alty, Liberal, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Mr. Speaker, all major projects will only proceed after meaningful consultation with indigenous rights holders. We cannot and will not move forward at the expense of indigenous rights. Budget 2025 invests $10.1 million in the federal initiative on consultation. This includes funding for consultation protocols, which set out clear, mutually agreed processes for how communities want to be engaged, making consultations more efficient and respectful. We have also invested in indigenous-led resource centres, which provide the research, technical advice and expertise communities need.

Natural Resources

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

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals killed the northern gateway pipeline project, making Canada more dependent on the U.S. Now, the Prime Minister is putting on a big show, but he is setting up another process for a pipeline to fail, with new hurdles and hoops and, worst of all, a massive increase to the industrial carbon tax. The proposed pipeline is never going to happen, because the Prime Minister is giving a veto to the B.C. premier. What is guaranteed to happen after April 1 is that Albertans will pay a very real and very massive hike in the industrial carbon tax.

Why is the Prime Minister more intent on hiking carbon taxes instead of building pipelines?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is perplexing to us over here why they keep talking about some supposed veto by the B.C. premier when, in fact, of course, we will deal with the people and the province of British Columbia. What they do not mention is the signature of the Premier of Alberta on a memorandum of understanding that commits us to consulting provinces, consulting first nations, building out clean and renewable technologies, an electric grid, and building and creating opportunity for young western Canadians for generations to come.

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

Mr. Speaker, it does not matter how many signatures they put on that MOU if they give a giant veto stamp to the British Columbian premier. Instead of just repealing all the Liberal leave-it-in-the-ground laws that killed energy projects, the Prime Minister has just unveiled a new process that is designed to fail. He is giving an unconstitutional veto to the B.C. premier. He is forcing Albertans to pay billions of dollars to put air into the ground, and now he is hiking the industrial carbon tax. Every time the Liberals hike those carbon taxes, everything gets more expensive.

Why is the government forcing through a massive hike to the carbon tax instead of just getting out of the way?

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

Mr. Speaker, as Canadians watch this debate unfold, they will take note of lines like putting “air into the ground”. In fact, we are putting carbon into the ground. We are taking it out of the atmosphere, making our production of energy resources less carbon-intensive and putting carbon, in fact, underground, therefore, committing Canada to the fight against climate change. It is very interesting, and I know Canadians will be following this debate with great interest. The slogans of the Conservatives will be something they will not forget.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Ponoka—Didsbury, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the current Prime Minister was the adviser to the last prime minister. Under his watch, no private company was able to build a pipeline, not TC Energy, not Enbridge, not Kinder Morgan, just the Canadian taxpayer. Now, we learn Alberta must initiate a carbon capture project via the Pathways Alliance in exchange for a pipeline. Who has a significant stake in Entropy, one of the leading Pathways carbon capture companies? It is none other than the Prime Minister's company, Brookfield.

This begs the question, is the only way anything can be built in Canada is if Brookfield profits?

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

Mr. Speaker, the owners of the Pathways project for carbon capture and storage are in fact six oil and gas companies, all of which operate in the province of Alberta and employ thousands of—

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The hon. member for Ponoka—Didsbury has the floor.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Ponoka—Didsbury, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister has been meeting with Brookfield executives behind closed doors. This is the same Prime Minister who served as board chair of Brookfield Asset Management. Now we learn that he will not allow Alberta to build a pipeline unless it initiates a $16.5-billion carbon capture project where Brookfield profits. The taxes and royalties from a pipeline should be used for doctors, nurses, roads, schools, police, housing and securing our country, but instead, billions will now pour into the coffers of corporate giants and Liberal insiders, including, of course, Brookfield.

How much revenue does the Prime Minister have to divert to his own company before he demands that Canada just simply change its name to Brookfield?

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

Mr. Speaker, I think the members across, and maybe in particular those members from the province of Alberta, really underestimate how strongly their constituents feel about having a plan to reduce our carbon emissions, to reduce the intensity of our energy production, to, yes, lead the world in carbon capture and storage, and to build an energy grid throughout western Canada that makes sure renewable energy gets across western Canada. Most importantly, they underestimate the hopes of the parents of young Albertans who want to see a future for them in that province, and that is what this thing does today.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own cabinet and caucus are fighting over this pipeline announcement. Ministers are worried. B.C. Liberal caucus members are “seething” and “angry” and leaks are coming out by the hour. Meanwhile, Canadians know the real issue: Without a pipeline to the Pacific, the United States is basically our only market for Canadian oil. We cannot reach global buyers until we have coastal access.

When will the Prime Minister stop managing caucus drama and start using the authority he already has to guarantee a pipeline build to the coast?

[John Zerucelli, Liberal, Secretary of State (Labour)]

Mr. Speaker, today is an important day because this MOU means jobs in clean energy, jobs building data centres and jobs building the largest carbon capture project in Canada. These are jobs for young people, good union jobs for the building trades, for the IBEW, for the ironworkers, for LiUNA, for the UA and for the millwrights, for the workers who build this country every day.

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

Mr. Speaker, approving a nation-building project like a pipeline to the coast is the Prime Minister's responsibility. It sits squarely in the federal government's hands. Instead of owning that responsibility, the Prime Minister is letting the NDP premier in B.C. have a veto, and he is doing it to calm the anger in his own caucus, not to move the country forward.

When will the Prime Minister stop hiding behind the NDP premier and make the call that only his government has the jurisdiction to make?

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

Mr. Speaker, that member is a British Columbian MP. Is she seriously suggesting the people and the Government of British Columbia should have no say about a piece of infrastructure that will go across the entire breadth of that province? It is very interesting to me that this member, who represents British Columbians, would want to subtract the voice of her own provincial government from that debate, and for that matter, subtract the voices of first nations. This is a historic agreement. It sets out a path forward, but we are going to do it the Canadian way: co-operatively.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, is the Prime Minister facing open rebellion? A Liberal MP told CBC News that their caucus is “seething” and “angry” over a pipeline. No wonder the Prime Minister keeps flip-flopping. One day he is for a pipeline. The next day he claims it is up to B.C. NDP David Eby. The Constitution is absolutely clear that the sole authority over pipelines is the Prime Minister.

Is the Prime Minister breaking his promise to “no pipeline” David Eby, or will he break his promise to build it through delays, over-regulation and endless consultations?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again a British Columbian member of Parliament is standing up wishing to subtract the voice of his own provincial government, the duly elected government of the people of British Columbia, who wish to have a say over a development of infrastructure that would span the entire breadth of that province. I think when the member thinks a little more seriously about this issue, he will agree that co-operative federalism and working with provinces, including Alberta and British Columbia, on things like this historic announcement today are the right way to go.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are looking for collaboration, no doubt, but the Prime Minister went around to wave just another piece of paper that promises a potential pipeline maybe sometime in the future. In reality, it guarantees nothing. The only thing that was guaranteed today was that Albertans and Canadians will continue to pay more with the industrial carbon tax.

Canadians are looking for a guarantee. The simple question is, can the Prime Minister guarantee what year shovels will be in the ground on this proposed pipeline?

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

Mr. Speaker, two British Columbian MPs want to subtract the voice of their provincial government, and now an Albertan MP questions the wisdom of the Conservative Premier of Alberta, whose signature is still wet on a memorandum of understanding that comprehensively sets out an economic path forward for her province and for the young people who wish to create an economic future for themselves in that province.

I am amazed that the Conservative MPs from British Columbia and Alberta want to deny their own provincial governments the ability to create an economic future in western Canada.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Airdrie—Cochrane, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is still no construction date for the pipeline.

The Prime Minister blames everyone else, like the B.C. government and first nations, anyone but himself. Of course, it is really the “leave it in the ground” members of his own caucus who are trying to stop it.

The Prime Minister could approve an oil pipeline to the Pacific without a carbon tax, without delays and without any excuses. The proof is in the pudding, and it is not a pipeline until it is built.

Will the Prime Minister tell Canadians today when shovels will be in the ground on this oil pipeline? He can just give us a year.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, it has been interesting to see the Conservatives have a new-found interest in Canada's Constitution. They point out that on occasion the federal government has certain authorities in this respect, but they have not taken care to actually read the entirety of the provision they so routinely cite, which similarly empowers provincial governments to build the infrastructure necessary to operate a pipeline in this country. They similarly ignore section 35 of the Constitution, which guarantees the inherent and treaty rights of indigenous peoples in this country and requires the government to consult with rights holders who may be impacted.

We can build this country if we work together. It is a shame the Conservatives, after many opportunities to govern, have failed to learn that lesson.