House of Commons Hansard #52 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was debt.

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.

Criminal Code First reading of Bill C-255. The bill amends the Criminal Code regarding mischief to religious property, shifting financial burden from victims to criminals. It expands coverage to all vandalism at places of worship, not just hate-motivated acts. 200 words.

Petitions

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance The debate focuses on Budget 2025, with Members discussing its impact on Canada's economy and citizens. The Conservative Party criticizes the budget as reckless, citing a $78-billion deficit, rising national debt, and increased cost of living, while alleging it fails to address affordability for Canadians. Liberals defend the budget, highlighting investments in housing, infrastructure, and social programs like dental care, asserting Canada maintains a strong fiscal position with low debt-to-GDP in the G7. The Bloc Québécois and Green Party raise concerns about wasteful spending on oil companies, a lack of environmental funding, and increasing poverty. 45500 words, 6 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives condemn the Liberal government's record spending and $80-billion deficit, arguing it fuels inflation. They link rising food costs to the industrial carbon tax and criticize housing policy, warning of job losses. They also highlight growing debt interest payments and alleged offshore tax havens.
The Liberals defend their ambitious Budget 2025, highlighting investments to make life more affordable for Canadians. They emphasize historic funding for housing, health care infrastructure, seniors' programs, and infrastructure projects across Canada. The budget also focuses on economic growth, border security, defence spending, and fighting climate change.
The Bloc criticizes the government's budget for refusing to help retirees and young families access homes. They condemn the failure to increase health transfers and significant cuts to environmental initiatives, deeming it a "worst of both worlds" budget.
The NDP criticize the budget for failing to provide affordability crisis relief and for departmental cuts impacting programs and workers.

Clean Coasts Act Second reading of Bill C-244. The bill C-244 aims to strengthen Canada's ability to prevent and respond to marine pollution and abandoned vessels. It proposes to clarify that marine dumping is a strict liability offense under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and to prohibit the transfer of vessels to individuals the seller knows lack the means to maintain or dispose of them safely, seeking to hold polluters accountable and prevent future issues. 8100 words, 1 hour.

Adjournment Debates

Youth unemployment concerns Garnett Genuis criticizes the Liberal budget for lacking a jobs plan amidst high youth unemployment, citing their own Conservative youth jobs plan. Peter Fragiskatos defends the government's investments in infrastructure, housing, and the defense sector, while accusing the Conservatives of opposing measures to help workers and families.
Budget and housing affordability Jacob Mantle criticizes the budget's housing measures, citing experts who say it fails to address affordability and job creation. Jennifer McKelvie defends the budget's investments and initiatives like the housing accelerator fund and Build Canada Homes. Mantle questions whether companies connected to the Prime Minister will benefit.
Banning of Irish band Kneecap Elizabeth May questions if the Canadian government banned the band Kneecap and requests to know the evidence and decision-making process. Peter Fragiskatos declines to comment on individual cases and suggests May contact the relevant departments directly for answers, citing privacy concerns.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Mr. Speaker, we can take the time to look at what we have done in the past. This budget, with the kinds of dollars that are finally being invested in serious infrastructure, commits to moving things along faster than they previously have. There are changes being made in other regulations and so on that will really help move things forward. I am excited about the fact that we are making this commitment.

We all know it takes time and that these things do not happen overnight. I would certainly like to see it happening much faster than it did previously, when we were all tied up in regulation. We just finished signing an agreement with Indonesia. We have agreements with the Philippines and the U.K. All of those things will provide opportunities for many of our businesses to move forward.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Connie Cody Conservative Cambridge, ON

Mr. Speaker, the member generously offered to accept our comments and suggestions. Just recently, Bill C-3 was passed, and there were a lot of comments and suggestions made at committee that were reversed.

Why should we trust that our suggestions and comments will be moved forward?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Mr. Speaker, the issues we are dealing with today in this budget and moving forward on are affecting my family and everyone else's family. We are talking about the future of my children and grandchildren. We want to see these move forward. We should all be working together.

There is no guarantee that changes made at committee are going to be—

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Simcoe North.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Adam Chambers Conservative Simcoe North, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise on behalf of the residents of Simcoe North. I will be splitting my time with the wonderful new member for Souris—Moose Mountain, who I am sure will make—

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

November 6th, 2025 / 1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

I am going to interrupt the member.

There seems to be a device very close to the microphone that makes it harder for the interpreters to do their work.

The member can now continue.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Adam Chambers Conservative Simcoe North, ON

I apologize to our wonderful friends in interpretation. If it continues to be an issue, please let me know.

Let us get right into it. It must be really difficult to be a Liberal member of Parliament today, because here are the headlines following the budget, which is how we measure how the budget is being taken: “Budget shows Carney doesn’t know how tough it is out there on Main Street”. Another—

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

Members cannot use the name of the Prime Minister or any cabinet minister, whether directly or indirectly. When we are quoting, it is best to use the title of the member we are referring to.

I will let the member for Simcoe North resume.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Adam Chambers Conservative Simcoe North, ON

Mr. Speaker, I apologize. Old habits die hard.

The headline says, “Budget shows [the Prime Minister] doesn’t know how tough it is out there on Main Street”. Another headline reads, “The Liberals' growing deficit of trust”. Another one says that, after all the hype, the Prime Minister’s “first budget fails to meet the moment”. Another says, “Once again, [the Prime Minister] doesn’t quite live up to the hype”, followed by, “When the big day came, it wasn’t quite as advertised”. Reuters writes that the Prime Minister’s “first budget falls short on vow to transform Canadian economy”. Perhaps the most devastating is by Mr. Don Drummond, who was in the Chrétien-era finance department. He co-wrote, “A ‘generational budget’ that does little but set federal spending adrift”. This basically sums up the response to the budget

If we are wondering how the last 10 years have gone, we only have to look at the budget itself. The government writes in its own budget, on page 53, “If Canada’s productivity growth had matched the U.S. from 2017 to 2023, the median income of a family with one child would be nearly $11,000 higher.” This is in the government's own publication. It is an absolutely damning account of how things have been under the Liberal government. I am shocked this made it to print and that the Liberals would admit how badly it has been going for the government.

The last 10 years have been difficult. We are trying to get over the hangover of former prime minister Trudeau. This budget completes a number of reversals of former prime minister Trudeau's legacy. The digital services tax is gone. The luxury tax is gone. The underused housing tax is gone. The capital gains tax is gone.

The Liberals have flipped completely on stablecoins and bitcoin in this budget. Before, they made that a political football and put us behind the eight ball. When the leader of the official opposition said that Canada should be the fintech capital of the world, the government made it a political issue and instead set fintech innovation back in this country. Now, it is saying it wants to be part of the fintech revolution. It is now saying it might get rid of the emissions cap. Of course, now it is cancelling what it calls the “divisive” carbon tax. I am sorry, but the government cannot get a medal just for reversing the damage it has done.

All this talk in the budget is about economic activity that might not even occur. The superdeduction they are hanging their hat on is only about a couple of hundred million dollars more a year of stimulus than what is already there. They should have adopted the Conservative idea, which was to provide capital gains relief for Canadians or Canadian businesses when they sell an asset, if they reinvest that asset in Canada.

Even the government’s very overhyped GST cut for first-time homebuyers is only going to help a couple of thousand home purchasers a year. It could have adopted the Conservative idea, which was to cut the GST off all homes built in the year. This would help a far greater number of people and promote homebuilding in this country.

Let us remember that the government said it was going to get a lot of productive investments through SDTC and the green energy revolution. It said that we would see more productivity in electric vehicles, vaccine production facilities and ventilators that never even ended up being built. The Prime Minister is setting himself up to have a serious credibility problem. He supported the carbon tax all along the way and even disagreed with former prime minister Trudeau when they took the carbon tax off home heating in Atlantic Canada. It did not matter, anyway. He ended up cancelling the carbon tax just a few months later. Then, he called it “divisive” and said it made life more unaffordable when, before, the narrative about the carbon tax was that we were all better off having it, at the end of the month.

The Prime Minister wrote a book on climate change, saying that every decision in government had to be viewed through the climate prism. Now he does not really seem to talk about that very much. During the campaign, the Prime Minister said that China represented the greatest security threat to Canada, and now he says that China represents a new opportunity for Canada. Which one is it? Is China a security threat, or is it there for integration? The Prime Minister is himself showing that we simply cannot trust what he says, but the proof will be in the pudding.

One of my favourite high school teachers, a wonderful man named Mr. Cercone, said that it does not matter how much one makes but how much one spends. The bottom line is that people can be wealthy if they watch their expenditures, but the results of this fiscal plan are absolutely devastating for future generations. We used to spend about six cents of every dollar on interest payments on the national debt. That is now projected to more than double to 13¢ of every dollar. That will be about $76 billion of money going to bondholders and bankers instead of paying for social services. Even the IMF, which the government loves to trot out because it loves multilateral institutions, says that for the amount of money a government spends on interest on the debt, there is a corresponding decline in the amount of money that is spent on social services.

The government is also borrowing record amounts of money in the bond markets each year. Why does that matter? That matters for two reasons. One is that it always borrows on the short term, which means it has to roll this debt over year after year. This means the government is very sensitive to interest rate increases, and the Bank of Canada has warned now that 40% of the purchasers of government debt are actually hedge funds, which rely on buying and selling major government debts from all over the world and trading them immediately. If that system does not continue to work as it is working, we will see yields spike in Canada. That means higher interest rates, and higher interest rates mean higher debt service costs.

We are already spending more on servicing the debt than we send to the provinces for health care every year. We are spending more on servicing our debt than the government takes in from the GST every year. The GST that Canadians pay every day on every purchase they make, whether it is buying a car, items at a grocery store, clothing for some kids or basically anything, that amount of money for GST on every receipt we see does not even cover the interest payments on the national debt.

It is for these reasons that Conservatives cannot support the budget. The finance minister now has a new fiscal anchor, and I am willing to bet the fiscal anchor of deficit-to-GDP will be broken, because he is already close to breaking the fiscal anchor he set for himself in the budget two days ago.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Kings—Hants Nova Scotia

Liberal

Kody Blois LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I have two questions. The member is pretty artful, so I am sure he can answer both.

I think the Conservatives need to pick a lane on China. I hear members of Parliament, particularly from the western provinces, talking about the importance of engaging China to remove canola tariffs. The member suggests that engaging China is a bad idea. I think the Conservatives ought to get their position clear about where they stand on that engagement.

More importantly, on the debt that the member referenced, he talked about this being catastrophic and unsustainable. Will the member at least recognize that we are spending about 10¢ of every dollar on debt servicing? In 1990, it was 35¢. We are nowhere near the fiscal trajectory we were on back in 1990, and the government's plan is sustainable over time.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Adam Chambers Conservative Simcoe North, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are not on a sustainable track, because they have more than doubled the amount we spend on debt service costs. It is only going up, and that is if nothing changes. It was six cents in 2015; it is going to be 13¢ in just a couple of years, and that is if absolutely nothing changes. I do not believe that this is a sustainable path. Even former bank governor David Dodge says we have to be really worried when the government gets over 10%, or 10¢ of every dollar spent.

As it relates to China, it is actually the Prime Minister who has to answer to this House as to why, just a few short months ago, he said China represented the greatest security threat to this country and now he seems to be engaging and playing footsie with it under the table.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Mr. Speaker, earlier, the member for York Centre said in his speech that Canada is importing oil and oil products from Russia. I asked him to clarify and to give some numbers because I know that that is not allowed. Canada has been banning oil imports from Russia since 2022, and we have not imported any oil from there since 2019. He told me that Canada imported oil from Russia last year and that we also imported oil from Venezuela.

It is all well and good to have debates and disagreements, but we need to make sure that they are based on facts. If it is true that Canada is still importing oil from Russia or Venezuela in various ways, using loopholes that I am not aware of, as a supporter of Ukraine, I think that is totally unacceptable and that it should be denounced.

I would like to know whether the Conservative Party is stating that Canada is still importing oil from Russia, despite the ban. Is that the party's position?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Adam Chambers Conservative Simcoe North, ON

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I did not hear the intervention from my hon. colleague, and I am not sure of the stat he was referring to. I believe there have been some credible sources suggesting that because certain oil is being mixed from certain jurisdictions in the world, some shipments of oil around the world may contain Russian oil. That is obviously something that would be very concerning if any of that oil ends up on Canadian shores.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Tamara Kronis Conservative Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, the budget spends a lot of money on some things, but it also promises to cut spending, including on services that Canadians value. I asked a question about this earlier this morning and was supposed to be reassured by an answer from my colleagues that the CRA would be stepping in to improve efficiencies by filing tax returns presumptively for a number of Canadians.

With the CRA's accuracy rate below 20% in the case of humans and only at a third in the case of its chatbots, I am wondering if the hon. member could comment on the importance of these services to Canadians and improving government services, especially at this critical time for our country.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Adam Chambers Conservative Simcoe North, ON

Mr. Speaker, we absolutely need to improve the services for Canadians, but I would caution the government when it wants to increase services that do not exist today for Canadians while there are still two-hour waits on hold at the CRA when people call. I am not sure that giving the CRA additional things to do is going to provide the service the Liberals think.

The CRA has already been trying to file taxes on behalf of millions of Canadians who do not file taxes through a telefile program. The results of that have been incredibly underwhelming, so I am unclear as to what the Liberals think they are going to achieve by doing this.

By the way, do people trust the CRA to do their taxes properly on their behalf? I think it sounds like a bit of a conflict of interest.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Bonk Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I know that you are a bit of a student of history, and I just want to point out that 158 years ago today was the first convening of the Parliament of Canada.

For 148 of those years, all the governments that we have had combined spent less than the Liberals have spent in the last 10 years. I know that when Canadians heard the title of the budget, “Canada Strong”, they expected a budget that would be more affordable, would reward hard work and would restore confidence in our future. Instead, the Minister of Finance has delivered a budget that spends more, borrows more and achieves less.

It is the 10th Liberal budget, and after nearly a decade of reckless Liberal spending, Canadians are poorer, investment is weaker and our economy is falling further behind those of our global competitors. This is not strength. This is stubbornness disguised as leadership.

The Minister of Finance told Canadians he would control spending and bring discipline back to Ottawa, but, once again, the government could not resist the temptation to use borrowed money to paper over deeper concerns. He promised to rein in deficits, but the deficit continues to grow. He promised to make life more affordable, yet Canadians are hit with higher costs on everything: groceries, fuel, housing and interest rates. He promised that the budget would rebuild confidence, but confidence is collapsing, investment is leaving and Canadian productivity, the backbone of our standard of living, remains stuck in neutral.

For all that talk about nation building, the budget continues a dangerous pattern of more debt, more bureaucracy and no results. The government now spends more money on interest payments than it does on health care. That is not a sign of a strong nation. That is the sign of a government that refuses to make the hard choices.

Canadians are making sacrifices every day, but the federal government refuses to make any on their behalf. Every dollar spent on servicing the debt is a dollar that we cannot spend on helping seniors, supporting hospitals or investing in infrastructure. This is not sustainable, and it is not responsible.

I want to share a story from a farm family I met recently in my riding. It was nothing dramatic, just coffee at a kitchen table and a conversation about how things were going on their farm. They run a small mixed operation, grain and cattle. They are not the type to complain. They are the kind of family who gets up early, works late and steps up when their neighbours need help. As we talked, the wife said something very interesting to me. She said, “We've always been careful with money, but in the past year everything has just moved faster than we can keep up with.” Fuel, fertilizer, repairs, insurance, groceries, every single cost went up, but their income did not.

Like so many young farm families, they are doing everything right. They are managing their debt, working extra hours and cutting back where they can, but they are still falling behind. Then she told me something I did not expect to hear from farmers. She said, quietly, “We had to go to the food bank.” Then she added something that cut right to the heart of it, “We're farmers. We feed Canada and the world, and now we rely on the food bank to feed our own family.”

She was not asking for sympathy. She was not angry. She was embarrassed, but she should not have to be. This is a family that works at community fundraisers, helps neighbours and contributes to feeding the entire country and the world. After nearly 10 years of Liberal policies driving up costs at every turn, even the people who feed Canada cannot reliably feed their own children.

This is not what a strong country looks like. It is not the Canada they were promised. If there is one symbol of prairie success, it is canola, a made-in-Canada innovation that farmers turned into a world-leading crop. However, the government has failed to defend the success that canola represents. Foreign tariffs remain in place, trade barriers continue and market access is shrinking.

Instead of fighting for our producers, the government issues press releases and photo ops, while the actual work of trade sits undone. Instead of lowering taxes on fuel and fertilizer, the government raises them. Instead of helping producers move product to market, it creates layers of new red tape.

Farmers do not need handouts; they need trade deals and respect. The budget delivers neither.

This budget claims to invest in the future, but when we read the details, the Prairies are treated as an afterthought again. There is no plan for the roads or rail lines that move our exports, there is no meaningful investment in trade corridors and there is no support for the rural infrastructure, water, broadband and bridges that communities depend on. Instead, we get another Ottawa-run sovereign fund and another layer of bureaucracy deciding which regions get attention and which get ignored. This is not partnership; this is paternalism. Prairie people do not need Ottawa to run more programs. They just need Ottawa to get out of the way.

The same neglect extends to our resource industries, which build our economy, fund our social programs and support thousands of hard-working families. From the potash mines around Rocanville to the oil fields near Estevan and Weyburn, workers are ready to innovate, grow and help make Canada energy-independent. However, this budget offers nothing to accelerate responsible development, nothing to improve regulatory timelines and nothing to secure long-term export capacity. Instead, the government is layering on new rules, new taxes and new delays that would make it harder for projects to move forward and easier for investors to look elsewhere.

A strong country needs strong resource industries, but this budget would weaken them instead of strengthening them. For all the money that is being spent, there is almost nothing in this budget to make our country more productive. There is no plan to make it easier to start a business, no plan to reduce red tape or regulatory duplication and no plan to attract investment and keep it here.

The Minister of Finance talks about “inclusive growth”, but Canadians are excluded. They need opportunity. They need confidence that their hard work will pay off. This budget does not deliver that confidence.

Conservatives cannot support this budget for one simple reason: It would make life harder for the very people it claims to help. It would drive up inflation through uncontrolled spending, discourage investment through higher taxes and regulation, undermine the provinces through federal overreach, and ignore the sectors of agriculture, energy and manufacturing that create wealth.

Canadians are not asking for more programs. They are asking for the ability to get ahead by their own hard work. This budget would make that harder, not easier.

Conservatives believe in a Canada that works for the people who do the work. We believe in rewarding effort, not punishing it. We believe that every region and every province should have the same chance to succeed. We believe a government should respect the people who feed us, build our homes and power our economy. Our vision is simple. We would make life affordable again, end inflationary spending and build homes and infrastructure more quickly. We would celebrate agriculture and resource development, not punish it, and restore hope in hard work so that once again it will be enough. That is the country we believe in.

This budget tells Canadians that the government knows best. Conservatives believe Canadians know best.

This budget would grow the government while shrinking opportunity. It would punish work, erode trust and leave entire generations behind. For that hard-working family in my riding and countless others like them across this country, Conservatives cannot and will not support this budget. The real strength of Canada does not come from another deficit or another announcement, but from the Canadians who build, grow and produce the wealth that keeps this nation alive. They deserve a government that trusts them, respects them and finally stands up for them.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Kings—Hants Nova Scotia

Liberal

Kody Blois LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned two issues that are important to me. One is agriculture and the other is canola. Having worked on this file and having sat in on the bilateral meeting the Prime Minister just had with President Xi, I would ask the hon. member about two things.

First, I hear consistently from the Conservative benches that we should not, as a government, be engaging with or trying to recalibrate the relationship with China. I am wondering if he could give his thoughts on that, given how important it is in his constituency. I wonder whether he might engage and share some wisdom with some of his colleagues about the importance of doing that, if we are going to support western farmers.

Second, he talked about there being a lack of emphasis in the budget on agriculture. I reject that premise. A number of issues around agriculture have been mentioned, including supports. What I find most surprising, though, is that there was nothing in the Conservative platform for agriculture whatsoever. Would he have a comment on that as well?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Bonk Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, trade with China is extremely important to the canola sector, but it seems that every time the Liberal government engages with China, it comes home with a new tariff. The next time they are in negotiations, I want the Liberals to take a better look at the people who are feeding the country and supporting agriculture, and the many jobs they support across the entire industry. It is something we need to take this seriously. We need to come home with results, instead of empty words, promises and photo ops.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Bloc

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to engage with my colleague on a matter of great concern to me, specifically science, research and innovation. As the Bloc Québécois critic for this file, I always make it my duty to express the concerns and demands of the scientific community.

This budget does not include any increase in funding for the three granting agencies or anything to boost student scholarships. There is nothing to offset the inflation that is stifling university researchers. This government claims that it wants to be the world leader in innovation, but innovation requires research.

Could my colleague explain how this government can claim to be leading the world in innovation when it refuses to invest in the science that makes that possible?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Bonk Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I will speak to agriculture. Canada is leading in many sectors of innovation when it comes to agriculture, but because of the lack of supports and the systems that are in place, which actually make it harder for innovation to come to market in Canada, we find that a lot of our entrepreneurs and innovators are developing their products in Canada and then leaving for other jurisdictions. This was not addressed in the budget, but it is very important for the future growth of Canada.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB

Mr. Speaker, the government wants to borrow $321 billion over the next four years, borrowing $78 billion in this year alone. That represents $8,000 per Canadian. Where is the prosperity in the budget? Where are the benefits to Canadians in the budget? It would put an additional $8,000 on the shoulders of each and every single Canadian.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Bonk Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, that question hits exactly the point I made in my speech regarding the farm family I met.

The government is spending so recklessly. Every time it prints money, it increases inflation. Every time it increases inflation, it increases the price of all of the goods farmers have to buy, all of their inputs and all of their daily living expenses. There is a real human cost to these overruns and these deficits. I wish the Liberals would take that a bit more seriously, instead of thinking there is an unlimited piggy bank.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, the member really surprised me when he talked earlier about the role he played in Saskatchewan. He talked about the importance of trade. When we think of trade, we could talk about what the Prime Minister has done to date.

Let there be no doubt about this. Looking at the last 10 years, we have seen more trade agreements signed than in any government before this one, yet the member tried to give the false impression that trade may not be good for the Canadian farmers in the Prairies. I am from the Prairies. Trade agreements are a good thing. No government in the last—

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

I have to interrupt the parliamentary secretary to give the hon. member for Souris—Moose Mountain a chance to respond in 25 seconds or less.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Bonk Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member opposite that everything he just said was recorded. He should go back and look at what I actually said so he knows he is putting words in my mouth, because I definitely did not mean that. Trade is extremely important to us and we need to promote it, not discourage it as the Prime Minister has been doing.