House of Commons Hansard #64 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-4.

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 Second reading of Bill C-225. The bill seeks to amend the Criminal Code to address intimate partner violence, classifying intimate partner murder as first-degree and creating specific offences. It also proposes stricter bail conditions for repeat offenders and enhanced risk assessments. While supporters see it as a vital step to combat an "epidemic" of violence, some members raise concerns about potential unintended consequences for victims acting in self-defence and propose amendments. 8200 words, 1 hour.

Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act Third reading of Bill C-4. The bill proposes measures to make life more affordable for Canadians. It includes lowering the lowest federal income tax bracket, eliminating GST on new homes for first-time homebuyers, and permanently removing the consumer carbon tax. Conservatives argue the measures are insufficient and criticize the industrial carbon tax's retention. The Bloc Québécois opposes it, citing negative impacts on vulnerable taxpayers and demanding compensation for Quebec's carbon tax contributions. Liberals emphasize the bill's direct tax relief and housing support, attributing some affordability challenges to global factors. 39900 words, 5 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives condemn the Liberal government for escalating food insecurity and record food bank usage due to high taxes and inflation. They highlight job losses and declining housing affordability, exacerbated by the industrial carbon tax. The party also questions the government's commitment to pipeline projects and Indigenous consultations, while accusing the Prime Minister of using tax havens.
The Liberals highlight their support for Canadian families through initiatives like the Canada child benefit, school meal programs, and affordable housing investments. They address unjustified US tariffs affecting Canadian jobs, emphasize climate action with the Canada-Alberta energy agreement, and champion AI innovation. The party criticizes the Conservatives for opposing these crucial measures and advancing border security.
The Bloc condemns the Liberal-Alberta oil deal as a "climate betrayal," claiming it makes Canada a worse environmental offender. They accuse the government of scrapping 2030 targets and abandoning environmental policies, increasing oil production, and betraying Quebeckers' interests.
The NDP calls for a coordinated system for marine debris spills, funded by an ecosystem service fee to protect coasts.

Petitions

Admissibility of Committee Amendments to Bill C‑12 Luc Berthold argues that committee-adopted Conservative amendments to Bill C-12 are admissible, contending they are relevant to the bill's purpose despite a Liberal challenge based on the "parent act rule." 1200 words, 10 minutes.

Adjournment Debate - Border Security Jacob Mantle raises concerns about frequent CBSA system outages, disrupting trade and border operations, criticizing the CBSA's response to his inquiry. Jacques Ramsay acknowledges the issue with the new CARM software, stating the minister has requested an investigation and the government is investing in border security. 1100 words.

Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Bloc

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate my colleague, who always has good, intelligent and well-thought-out questions.

I have to agree that, yes, he seems to have woken up. At the same time, I cannot criticize the guy. He was trying to change things from within.

There are two ways to work in politics. The first is to come in and toe the line, and the second is to try to get inside the system and make changes from within. I think what ultimately pushed the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie to resign was the cap on greenhouse gas emissions and the fact that generating electricity from thermal power plants in the west will now be permitted, but it will no longer be included in the pricing. Those things matter. I mentioned architecture earlier. There is not enough time to say very much in a 10-minute speech. I think that is what was so disappointing. Sooner or later, after swallowing so many bitter pills, the last one is too much to bear.

I have to say yes, that I agree in part with what my colleague just said, but I still—

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

I must give the hon. member for Laurentides—Labelle a little time to ask a question in 30 seconds.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Bloc

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague whether he heard the response from Quebec's former finance minister when I asked him a question and told him that investments are assets and equipment. Investing in loans and in tax cuts is an economic lever, but no one can convince me that that is an investment, per se.

Would my colleague agree that the current budget is nothing more than smoke and mirrors to win votes?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Bloc

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Mr. Speaker, that was quite the assist. Yes, I agree with my colleague. Her comment basically demonstrates what I was saying in my speech.

I was saying that this government is all about looking and sounding a certain way. It talks about a generational budget, saying that it is an investment. However, when we scratch beneath the surface and take a closer look, it is clear that they are spending money and pretending that they have just bought a house. I am sorry, but people cannot go to the bank one morning to borrow money saying that they gave their brother-in-law $10,000 and claiming that is their collateral. It does not work that way. To provide collateral, they need to have an asset.

The finance minister's creative accounting is nonsense.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my friend from Richmond—Arthabaska.

I rise today to speak on Bill C-4. Although this bill is inspired by the Conservatives' platform and promises, Bill C-4's collection of half measures does not deal with the real drivers of the affordability crisis: large deficits, high spending, and heavy taxation and regulation. We acknowledge the Liberals for admitting that certain measures are needed after 10 years of Liberal economic mismanagement, which has caused high inflation, doubled housing costs, and high food prices, and, on top of the pandemic pressures, has made life unaffordable for everyday Canadians. However, no matter how we slice it, Bill C-4's impact is too small compared to the previous tax increases, carbon pricing and other failed Liberal economic policies.

When I think about affordability, I think of the residents of Edmonton Northwest who have been hit hardest by Liberal policies that are out of touch with everyday Canadians. For seniors on fixed incomes, who are among the hardest hit by rising grocery, energy and housing costs, Bill C-4 does not provide targeted relief. Seniors are worried about being able to stay in their long-term care facilities or their own homes, or even being able to afford to be active in the community, such as at the Westend Seniors Activity Centre. I also think about the many others who are left out of Bill C-4: low-income, working-age adults who do not earn enough to pay income tax; people who pay large shares of their income on rent; people not old enough for OAS; food-insecure households who need more than hampers; women-led households with multiple children; uncompensated caregivers; people new to Edmonton Northwest; and the list goes on.

Food Banks Canada reports that food bank visits doubled since 2019 to about 2.2 million in March 2025. These are everyday, middle-class Canadians who are now relying on food banks. One in five clients is employed and one in three is a child, with 70% living in market-rent housing. The Liberal government's school lunch program ignores the two-thirds of individuals who rely on food banks who are not children. In their recent report, Food Banks Canada says, “the program does not directly address the structural causes of food insecurity”. Critics also say that this government is out to lunch:

The Carney government says its November budget empowers and invests in Canadians. But it lacks meaningful measures to reduce food insecurity—an important indicator of economic well-being and a strong predictor of poor physical health. It is therefore out of touch with the financial struggles that millions of Canadians face.

Eighty-three per cent of food banks say that “more affordable housing [is] the single most important policy intervention”, which is up from 61% in 2019. Low-income households are now spending about 66% of their disposable income on shelter. Instead of flowing funds to the many urban and indigenous organizations, who have plans and shovels ready to address housing, the government wants to put more money to grow the Ottawa bureaucracy it promised to cut.

Existing renters, especially in big cities, see little in Bill C-4 that addresses their rent increases this year. This is yet another example of elite-banker policies that are disconnected from the realities faced by everyday Canadians. Supply-side housing measures, such as Build Canada Homes and the GST rebate on new rental housing, will take years to see more new homes built. They also do not compare to the stated need for 500,000 homes per year and do not immediately lower rents for current tenants.

In Edmonton Northwest, these measures structurally leave out a growing group of residents who can only afford to rent. Record rents and huge mortgages benefit banks, institutional investors, property management companies and other friends of the Prime Minister. The government has no serious plans to help young people who struggle to build their lives or to restore affordability. While young people are looking to move into affordable starter homes, house-rich but cash-poor seniors are paying ever-increasing property taxes on homes they cannot afford to live in or sell.

Announcing the concept of a plan for housing at Build Canada Homes without money and programs on the ground only delays investments that could be made today in the hope that government will subsidize some of the costs. This is just another example in the government's suite of affordability failures and half measures.

We have heard from stakeholders that the dental care plan requires significant new red tape on the part of dental professionals, who are already in short supply. Being modelled on the non-insured health benefits program for indigenous peoples means that this dental care program will more strongly favour the minority of Canadians who are lucky enough to have practitioners who will spend hours or sometimes days on the phone with the insurer to advocate persistently for the basics of medically necessary treatments for their patients. On the other hand, this will give Canadians a taste of the disastrous bureaucratic inequities that many indigenous people face daily.

We have heard directly from persons with disabilities that the Canada disability benefit and the entire system for enrolling into the federal program is a nightmare for taxpayers and practitioners. The government has built massive paperwork and inconsistent bureaucracies, where somehow we put CRA instead of medical professionals in charge of determining who does or does not have a disability. The Auditor General found that CRA was unreliable even for tax information. Why would vulnerable Canadians trust CRA on medical matters?

Now I will speak to the few positives of Bill C-4. Bill C-4 would finally repeal the consumer-facing carbon tax, after nearly a decade of stumbling around. I am glad the government has finally listened and admitted its cornerstone climate policy failed, but that has not changed its overall spending and regulatory approach. It had the power to fix the carbon tax without a bill years ago, but waited to maximize political benefit over the needs of Canadians. Household goods and services that have the industrial carbon tax baked in are not suddenly going to be less expensive.

Many car-dependent workers and families in Edmonton Northwest will certainly benefit. Tradespeople, delivery drivers, warehouse and logistical workers, health care staff and others commuting by car from the northwest into other parts of the city will feel the immediate gain from lower fuel charges at the pumps brought on by the lobbying efforts of the Conservative Party, but that leaves out the lowest-income Albertans who cannot afford to drive or have no jobs to drive to. Those are some of the people the Liberals exploited to champion the carbon tax years ago with the promise of rebates.

This new automatic tax-filing program will probably increase the take-up of benefits, which matters a lot for very low-income households who currently do not file. We heard from students studying in health fields that couch surfing without a permanent address to file taxes remains a top concern, just as it would be for some of the folks who would gain the most from access to benefits.

Going forward, how can Canadians trust the same Liberal government that saddled current and future generations for the last decade to fix what it has broken? The Prime Minister promised to get tariffs fixed in July, and now Liberals are promising to make life more affordable. This is another promise they are poised to break.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about Bill C-4, obviously we are talking about the carbon tax. The point is that when we talk about the carbon tax, we are talking, sincerely and correctly, about the exploitation of all kinds of energy and natural resources.

Can the member inform the House about his experience as a leader of his community in terms of natural resources? Can he share with the House his experience with his community and the federal and provincial governments?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Mr. Speaker, certainly in my experience as the chief of my community, we always had the paternalistic aspect of the federal government with Indian Oil and Gas oversight of how we developed our resources. There always seemed to be some kind of hidden motivation there when it came to limiting access to the resources back directly to the community or whether it was negligence on its part to actually regulate.

Again, this is the same federal government that is administering a carbon tax for the whole country with the same principles and the same bureaucracy. I do not trust it to be any better at making life more affordable by keeping these same policies in place.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Kings—Hants Nova Scotia

Liberal

Kody Blois LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I found my hon. colleague's remarks to be balanced. Obviously, there were moments when he critiqued, but remarkably, he talked about some things that are positive in the bill, which gives me confidence that he will hopefully see this bill through before Christmas.

There are a couple of things I want to highlight. It was the Atlantic caucus and the rural caucus of the Liberal Party that helped make the adjustments and changes to the consumer carbon tax. On carbon pricing in this country, again, to change the record, we allow provinces to do that. Premier Danielle Smith made it very clear during her UCP address that it is the provincial government that actually controls the carbon pricing at the industrial level in the province.

Will the member support passing this bill before Christmas? It is urgent that we get this through for Canadians. He highlighted some of the positive aspects. Will he talk to the House leader and whip of his party to see this bill pass before Christmas?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Mr. Speaker, proper due diligence is still required on this bill. As mentioned, it has several shortcomings. It did do a few good things when it came to the consumer carbon price, but at the end of the day, I still think it was this side of the House that advocated for that and made it happen for Canadians. We will still do our due diligence on this side of the House, and we will see what happens to make life more affordable for Canadians. In the first place, it should have happened a long time ago. Canadians should have had a Christmas in 2025 that was more affordable, instead of having the one of the last 10 years, which was set up to fail by the Liberal government.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Bloc

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Edmonton Northwest. I particularly appreciative his very sensible contributions to the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs and the role he plays as a first nations member in ensuring that the voice of first nations is heard in the House.

Bill C‑4 does not put forward anything specific for first nations, yet the needs are enormous. The government is saying that cutting taxes, eliminating the carbon tax and other measures will have a huge impact on the budget deficit. These are funds that could have been invested in communities.

What impact will this really have? What measures would my colleague have liked to see put in place to help his community and many others across Quebec and Canada?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Mr. Speaker, I like serving with my colleague on committee as well, but that aside, as for his question today, nothing in this current bill, Bill C-4, addresses first nations. The current Liberal government is doing cutbacks on the ISC budget to the tune of over $2 billion. In addition to that, it has zeros across the board for years to come when it comes to reconciliation. I find, again, that first nations are being left out. The excuse from the government is that it will consult them on Zoom, but nothing is ever going to happen. It is all reconciliation rhetoric from the Liberal government.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on his own leader's position in regard to a pipeline going through the province of British Columbia. The leader of the Conservative Party believes he does not need indigenous consent or the consent of the Province of B.C.

What are the member's thoughts in regard to his leader's commitment to not consult with indigenous people?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Billy Morin Conservative Edmonton Northwest, AB

Mr. Speaker, our leader has never said anything as of such. We certainly have section 35 rights. Nobody has ever talked against those rights. I think it is the leader's position that the Liberal government has said it will do consultation half-assed, therefore setting this project up for failure. It had eight months to do this one-on-one engagement. It is only now saying it is going to be done through Zoom in the months coming forward. I have no faith in the government to get reconciliation done in order to get a pipeline built.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, today, we are here to talk about Bill C-4, which seeks to make life more affordable for Canadians. My Conservative colleagues and I supported Bill C-4 at second reading. I think that all members agree that we need to put more money back in taxpayers' pockets. Since 2015, everything costs more and Canadians are working harder for every dollar they earn. It is more important than ever for the government to take measures to support our workers, our families and our seniors during this cost-of-living crisis.

It is especially important to help Canadians who continue to struggle because of food inflation. It is becoming more and more difficult to put food on the table. A father told us that he and his wife eat only if there is any food left after their children have eaten. Who here has ever said that they would eat if there was any food left? There are people out there right now who are saying that. That breaks my heart. We need to do everything in our power to put money back in the pockets of these men and women so that they can earn a decent living and support their families.

According to the food price report published by the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University, 80.6% of Canadians say that food is the main source of financial stress and 25.5% of Canadians are food insecure. That is one in four. The average family of four is going to spend $800 more this year on groceries than it did in 2024. According to Food Banks Canada, the number of Canadians visiting food banks reached a record high of 2,165,766 visitors in March 2025.

Food Banks Canada has even said that “employment is no longer a reliable buffer against poverty”. What does that mean? That means that even Canadians who have a job are not immune to food insecurity. Among those experiencing food insecurity—one in four—are those who work full time and are still struggling. People in my community and all across the country are working hard, but the Liberal government's endless spending continues to make livelihoods unaffordable.

I have the privilege of serving as a member of the Standing Committee on Finance and the Conservative members of the committee proposed several amendments to Bill C-4. This bill essentially incorporates three of the Conservative Party's election pledges. It lowers income tax, offers a tax rebate on new homes and eliminates the consumer carbon tax. The difference is that we want to go further.

First, the bill reduces the tax rate from 15% to 14%. We proposed reducing it from 15% to 12.75%. Our proposal would have saved Canadians $900 per year instead of $420. As costs continue to rise, Canadians deserve a bigger tax cut so they can buy the food they and their families need. Unsurprisingly, the Liberals rejected our amendment. I also want to mention that, during committee proceedings, the Liberals systematically filibustered this amendment for over an hour, proving how reluctant they are to lower taxes.

Second, our Conservative team proposed expanding the tax rebate on new homes. Bill C‑4 proposes a rebate, but only on new homes that are first homes. What we are proposing is that this rebate apply to all Canadians who purchase a new home. This would stimulate the construction industry, ease pressure on the housing market, and provide significant assistance to Canadians. On this side of the House, that is what we believe is needed.

We did everything in our power during the housing crisis to call for more affordable housing and more construction using this approach, but unsurprisingly, the Liberals refused.

Third, we proposed permanently axing the consumer carbon tax and the industrial carbon tax, which make life less affordable. The Conservatives were ready to do that. Unsurprisingly, the Liberals rejected that proposal.

The Liberals took one tiny step forward to alleviate the cost of living crisis by introducing Bill C-4. However, they took several steps backward when they tabled this budget. The Conservatives consulted Canadians and then recommended priorities that should be included in the budget to address the cost of living, such as bringing down the deficit, eliminating the taxes on groceries and ending the inflationary taxes. Unfortunately, but once again unsurprisingly, the budget did not address these priorities. Instead, the Liberals chose not to tackle the issue of affordability. They decided to use our children's, grandchildren's and great‑grandchildren's credit cards. They decided to spend, spend, spend, spend and run a $78-billion deficit.

The federal bureaucracy has increased by 80% since 2015 when the Liberals came to power, yet services have not improved. Instead of reining in the inflationary spending that keeps making the cost of living crisis worse, the government continues to favour bureaucracy over affordability. Taxpayers continue to bear the cost of these deficits. Interest on the public debt will reach $55.6 billion in 2025–2026. Each and every Canadian will owe approximately $1,350 in interest. It will cost $1,350 per person in interest alone.

Personally, I am still stunned that the Liberals decided not to tackle the cost of living in their budget. However, the Prime Minister decided that it would be a good idea to lower taxes on luxury items, more specifically, the tax on private yachts, instead of focusing on removing the taxes on groceries. We are talking about priorities. As the Prime Minister has shown, his priority was the luxury tax on private yachts.

Meanwhile, a record number of people are using food banks. Household budgets are getting tighter and tighter. The cost of housing is extremely high. Everything is more expensive, yet the government is lowering taxes on private yachts.

In committee, the Liberals had a chance to support our amendments to lower taxes for all Canadians. The Liberals had a choice: They could lower taxes for workers and families or they could lower taxes for private yacht owners. They chose to help private yacht owners.

Canadians are worried. Food costs more. Housing costs more. Everything costs more. Bill C-4 aims to make life more affordable, but we would like to see it go even further. We have made proposals. I hope that the Liberals will listen to our suggestions to finally help Canadians make ends meet.

On this side of the House, our priority will always be to help make life in this magnificent country of Canada safer and more affordable for Canadians and their families.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba Liberal Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is always fearmongering.

Since his colleague did not have an opportunity to answer the question, can he tell us today whether his party is going to support this bill in the House?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, we made some proposals to the Liberal government to take it a step further. We need to cut taxes even more so that we can put money back in the pockets of Canadians. That is what we are going to propose.

We also wanted to eliminate the industrial carbon tax. We made some proposals on this side of the House. The ball is now in the Liberals' court.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Bloc

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

Mr. Speaker, this bill is poorly thought out. The government is offering a tax cut, but at the same time, this means higher taxes for some seniors and some people with disabilities.

What does my colleague think about these flaws in the bill?

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, members on this side of the House want to significantly reduce taxes so that all Canadians will have more money in their pockets to help them cope with the cost-of-living crisis.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK

Mr. Speaker, I was reading in the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report about the tax break the Liberals are supposedly giving to people. For a couple with a child, if they are both in the first income tax bracket, it would amount to only about $20 a month in savings for that family. When I look at the cost of groceries, I see that the cost of butter alone is up two dollars. If people are using butter for cooking and different things, they would eat into the $20 savings pretty quickly. A person could spend that amount just on butter alone in a year.

I am wondering what my colleague has to say about the cost of living and about how the so-called affordability bill would not actually go far enough to help Canadians with the affordability crisis.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we proposed.

Currently, Bill C‑4 does not go far enough to put more money back in taxpayers' pockets. The proposed tax cut amounts to about $400 per year, which is not enough. We need to go further to put more money back in taxpayers' pockets. That is what the Conservatives will propose.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Kings—Hants Nova Scotia

Liberal

Kody Blois LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I heard my colleague talk about the importance of agriculture, agri-food and our farmers. However, I was a bit surprised because there was absolutely nothing in the Conservative Party's platform last April for farmers across the country. My colleague represents a rural riding in Quebec. He can influence the Leader of the Opposition and the Conservative Party to include more measures for farmers in their platform for the next election. That is crucial for the country.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, and I also want to thank him for making the effort to ask it in French. I really appreciate that.

I want to reassure my colleague that when it comes to supply management, the Conservatives and the Quebec Conservative caucus will be there to protect farmers and support them in the future. To reiterate what I say in every one of my speeches, agriculture is about what we put on our plates morning, noon and night. I would like to take this opportunity to thank farmers, who work 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, to feed Canada.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Beauport—Limoilou.

I rise today to speak to Bill C-4, the making life more affordable for Canadians act.

For over a decade, I have had the enormous privilege and honour of representing the amazing people of my constituency of Davenport. It is a riding in the heart of downtown west Toronto, and it is home to 120,000 residents. It is a community that I love deeply. It is vibrant, diverse and hard-working. It is home to Canada's largest Portuguese community. It is also home to artists, entrepreneurs, newcomers and families whose roots stretch back generations. It is from their kitchen tables, their small businesses and their community centres that I draw both my purpose and my perspective.

We are living through what our Prime Minister has rightly called a rupture. It is not merely a transition, but a sharp change in a short period of time. The global order that has shaped our prosperity for decades is shifting beneath our feet. Trade relationships are being rewritten, alliances are being tested and our citizens are feeling the pressure. As the Prime Minister said in a pre-budget address, “if we don’t act now, the pressures will only grow.”

Bill C-4 is one of the many ways our government is acting. It is how we are responding to this moment: not with half measures, but with meaningful relief that puts money back in the pockets of Canadians who need it most.

I want to be direct about the reality Canadians are facing. According to Abacus Data polling from just last week, 64% of Canadians now name the cost of living as their number one concern, which is the highest level recorded this year. Some two-thirds of Canadians worry about affording the basics in the next six months. As the Abacus CEO put it, “the cost of living continues to be the dominant lens through which Canadians evaluate politics and policy.” We hear Canadians and we are responding, not just via Bill C-4, but through the plan and the numerous measures found in budget 2025.

Let me tell members what these national numbers look like in my riding of Davenport. The median household income is $85,000, which is close to the Toronto average, but 41% of our renter households spend more than 30% of their income on shelter. That is the definition of housing stress. More than 10% of the residents in my riding live in low income housing. Nearly half of my constituents rent their homes, many of which are in buildings constructed more than 60 years ago.

Davenport is also profoundly shaped by immigration, as 43% of my constituents were born outside of Canada. Another 30% are second-generation Canadians. They came here, as my family did, believing in the promise that hard work would lead to a better life. That promise must continue to mean something. Bill C-4 would deliver on that promise through three concrete measures.

First, we would cut taxes for the middle class. The lowest federal income tax bracket would drop from 15% to 14%. It would drop to 14.5% for 2025 and then to 14% permanently. This would benefit nearly 22 million Canadians. For a two-income family, that would mean up to $840 more in their pockets every single year. In my riding of Davenport, where 77% of our population is of working age, this would be direct relief for the people who power our economy.

Second, we would make home ownership possible again. The first-time homebuyers' GST rebate would eliminate GST on new homes priced up to $1 million and provide partial relief on homes priced up to $1.5 million. For a young couple in Davenport dreaming of their first home, this would mean savings of up to $50,000. In a city where housing has become a barrier to building a life, we are opening a door.

Third, we are lowering everyday costs. By permanently removing the consumer carbon price, we are reducing what Canadians pay at the pump and to heat their homes. For the seniors in Davenport living on fixed incomes, and for the small business owners watching every dollar, this is real, immediate relief. It started earlier this year, on April 1, and will continue to provide ongoing savings.

I want to speak to why these measures matter beyond the immediate dollars and cents and why strengthening our middle class is a matter of national security.

Just over a week ago, I had the privilege of attending the Halifax International Security Forum, alongside defence ministers, parliamentarians, security experts and others from around the world. The theme this year was dialogue, decency and democracy, and the message that echoed through every session was clear: Democracy has everything to do with international security. We heard that the foundations of democracy are showing cracks. We heard that democracies cannot meet external threats unless they are working internally, and we heard a truth that has been understood since Aristotle wrote his seminal book, Politics, more than 2,000 years ago: A strong middle class is the bedrock to a stable democracy.

This is not abstract political theory. The OECD has documented that thriving middle classes are the backbones of democratic societies and strong economies. Through their consumption, their investment in education and housing, their support for quality public services, their intolerance of corruption and their trust in democratic institutions, the middle class provides the very foundations of inclusive growth. Aristotle himself observed that democracies are safer and more permanent when they have an abundant or numerous middle class with a greater share in government. When there is no middle class, he warned, trouble arises and the state soon comes to an end.

Canada has always understood this. We have always invested in our middle class, not as a luxury but as a necessity. We have always ensured that those working hard to get ahead are given more than just hope. They are given opportunity. They are given a fair chance. Bill C-4 would continue that proud tradition.

Let me be clear: These three measures alone would not solve every challenge. Budget 2025 contains a comprehensive suite of investments in housing, in skills, in innovation and in defence that together would move us forward. Bill C-4 is a critical piece of that plan, with direct, immediate relief that would reach Canadians where they need it most. It is how we would ensure that Canadians have the resources to participate fully in our democracy and in our economy.

I am acutely aware that what we say in this chamber is recorded for history. Students will one day study this period, this moment of rupture and response, and they will ask whether we rose to meet the challenges of our time. I believe Bill C-4 is one of the many parts of how we answer “yes”. In my community, I think of Adelina, someone who lives on my street. She is a senior on a fixed income. She lives in Little Portugal, and she is going to be seeing lower heating costs this winter. I think of Carlos and Ana, second-generation Canadians saving for their first home, who will now be able to afford the down payment they never thought possible. I think of the small business owner in Dundas West who will keep more of what she earns to invest in her shop and her employees. I think of the young family in Junction Triangle, newcomers who chose Canada because they believe in its promise and who deserve a government that delivers on that promise.

I will be supporting Bill C-4 and I encourage all members of the House to do the same.

In my constituency of Davenport, we have a saying.

[Member spoke in Portuguese]

[English]

It means, together we are stronger. Let us be stronger together.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Mr. Speaker, this bill would reduce taxes for people, yes. We have already heard it is probably like $20 a month, so it is not a really big deal. If this government was truly serious about saving money and saving taxpayer money, I wonder if the member would consider changing the federal interim health benefits that asylum seekers get when they are denied asylum in Canada but are trying to stay on by appealing that decision. I mean benefits like vision care, urgent dental care and dental exams, dentures, nursing visits and emergency ambulances. Of course they would get basic health coverage, which we would agree with, but these extra benefits that asylum seekers who have been told to leave the country get are a way this government could save a significant amount of money and pass those savings on to Canadian citizens.

I am wondering why the government does not do that.

Bill C-4 Sitting ResumedMaking Life More Affordable for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his great work on the citizenship and immigration committee. He started off by saying that there is minimal savings through our middle-class income tax cut. I completely disagree with this statement. For a two-income family, it is $840 more in their pockets every single year. As someone who grew up in a working-class family, $840 extra a year would be a life change for us. It would mean a lot. It would actually buy us a lot more. If there was ever a family that knew how to use its dollars and put them to use effectively, it would be a working-class family or a middle-class family in Canada.