Debates of Dec. 4th, 2025

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Madam Speaker, like my colleague, I am very concerned about the fact that more and more seniors are asking for food assistance and going to food banks for help. We have seen the 2025 Hunger Count for Quebec, produced by the members of Food Banks of Quebec. In my riding, I have seen an increase in food aid in general, but particularly for seniors, and I am sure my colleague has seen something similar in his area.

I would like to ask my colleague the following question. Does he think it is acceptable for the government to continue, year after year, to discriminate against seniors aged 65 to 74, who were not eligible for an increase in old age security, unlike those aged 75 and over, even though they have the same obligations related to the increase in the cost of groceries and rent?

What does he think of the government's refusal to help seniors?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Madam Speaker, in the last 10 years under the Liberal government, the cost of food for families and seniors has doubled. In the last four years, the cost has gone up by 25%. A senior's income and a family's income have not kept pace with that.

It is going to require a complete change in direction from the government to end its inflationary policies and make life more affordable. Whether it is housing, food or fuel, in every measure, the government has pushed us in the wrong direction. It has pushed seniors and families to the very brink, where they are having to make terrible decisions about whether to heat their home, feed themselves or put fuel in their vehicle. Canadian seniors should not have to make that decision.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Madam Speaker, I also serve a riding in Atlantic Canada. One thing I commonly hear in my riding is that rural and remote communities have been left behind by the Liberal government and have also been punished by the high cost of everything and the policies the Liberals have implemented.

I am just wondering if my colleague hears the same thing. Maybe he would like to speak to that.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Madam Speaker, indeed, I hear from my rural communities that in rural parts of the country, in rural New Brunswick, people have to travel farther. That is a cost.

The government has increased the cost of fuel. The government has increased the cost of food. The government has increased crime, and we hear about that a lot in rural communities.

I am hearing about the affordability issue for families and seniors in rural areas, and only the Conservatives are committed to addressing it.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Fundy Royal for his great remarks. He brought up so many relevant subjects that need to be considered when we consider the implementation of this budget.

In preparation for my remarks today, an old saying came back to me, and I think it bears relevance today. I do not know if fellow members have heard the expression “Don't put the cart before the horse”. When it comes to the government's budget, I have to say that it is a superior example of putting the cart before the horse. What do I mean by that? We are investing tremendous amounts of taxpayer dollars into building an elaborate cart, expanding the cart, growing the cart, making the cart larger and have many compartments and increasing the storage and capacity of the cart while at the same time totally and entirely neglecting the horse.

Let us bring that to terms we can relate to. When we grow the size and scope of government, the cart, the deliverer of services, without ever prioritizing the needs of the horse, Canada's economy, which funds, fuels and hauls the cart of government from one objective to another, we have something that has misplaced the priorities that should be at the top of any government's priority list.

When the priority is growing the size and scope of government while neglecting the very thing that funds and fuels the government, we are going to have a problem. For 10 years, we have called out and criticized oil, gas, energy, agriculture and the many sectors that have helped to make Canada a truly amazing country. It is no wonder that people are frustrated and think we have our priorities wrong, or that the government has its priorities wrong.

We cannot be ever-expanding the load and burden upon fewer and fewer taxpayers. We cannot neglect the sectors that produce the wealth to generate the programs we rely upon, and then continually grow that level of dependence without expanding, rapidly growing and prioritizing the things that fund and fuel the economy.

I challenge the government to reprioritize, to look at the budget and say that maybe there are some things out of order. We are growing the burden on the taxpayer without growing the taxpayer base. We are growing the expectations of future generations of Canadians without growing the economy that will be able to fuel the very mechanisms of government that we are expanding.

To crystallize this, I want to talk quickly about a few categories. I always love alliterations, so I am going to give a few Fs for the pathway forward in Canada.

F number one is making sure that we make food affordable again. It is hard to work, carry out obligations or provide for a family if someone is struggling to put groceries on the table every week. We have seen under the Liberal government that the cost of groceries has doubled in the last 10 years. We are even seeing an expected increase of $1,000 more per year in the next fiscal year, on average, for Canadian households to put groceries on their tables. We are expecting feeding a family of four to cost $17,000 this year, and it will go to over $18,000 next year. For many families, that looks like an insurmountable mountain they must climb when they try to balance that cost with other needs in their households.

I must go further, to the source of food, and look at the increased burdens the government has brought upon our farmers. I have the privilege of serving on the agriculture committee, and trust me, we hear directly from our farmers and producers about soaring input costs. We put our farmers at a competitive disadvantage when they have to pay for things like the industrial carbon tax, the fuel standards tax and packaging taxes. All of this over-regulation and increased taxation is causing an undue burden on those who grow our food and generate food security for not only our country but countries around the world.

If we were to hear the voices of farmers, they would say, if we want to find a pathway forward, to take care of those who grow our food. They would say to take care of our farmers and would tell us to make sure we get out of their way so they can do what they do best, which is to plant, grow and produce good nourishment for Canadians and literally people around the world.

[An hon. member]

Don't muzzle the ox.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, do not muzzle the ox is exactly right. We should feed the horse that is hauling the cart, not starve the donkey bearing the burden. We need to make sure we are taking care of our farmers, and they will take care of Canadians. It is time we prioritize these things.

The next F I want to talk about in moving Canada on the pathway forward economically and to a future of prosperity is about making sure we deal with those in our fuel sectors, our oil and gas sectors. The government cannot talk those sectors down for 10 years, telling everybody we have dirty oil and dirty gas, and then expect those sectors to continue to produce at a high level when it has maintained policies that have been detrimental to their progress and prosperity, policies such as tanker bans, pipeline bans, overtaxation and industrial carbon taxes.

When these sectors are put at a regulatory and taxation disadvantage, the investment dollars for them are going to flee our country, and it is very hard for a country to move forward on the pathway to prosperity when those who generate our fuel are overcome. Emission caps and production caps are absolutely detrimental to the future prosperity of this country.

The next F I want to talk about is the forestry sector. The last Conservative prime minister we had was able to reach a deal in 80 days that lasted for 10 years. It has been over a decade that the Liberal government has been in power and there is still no relief for our forestry sector. We are seeing mills close all the time in our country, and people are losing good jobs across this nation. It is time we reprioritize. Canadians are looking for a government to put the priority on our forestry sector again.

That brings me to the consideration of rural Canadians, who are oftentimes the most overlooked and most forgotten segment of our nation. Those who live in rural and remote communities are oftentimes forgotten by the government in place now. Their way of life is oftentimes not considered when it comes to policies such as EV mandates, which take away the choice of the kind of vehicle they need and want to drive in in the areas in which they live.

The government attacks their way of life and traditions in hunting and fishing, with over-regulation and especially with firearms legislation that punishes the law-abiding firearms owner, hunter and sport shooter. The government misplaces the priorities of rural Canadians and says it is going to tackle crime by doing this. No, rural crime is soaring under the Liberals' watch, because they have neglected the issues that matter most.

If we want more security in rural areas, we need to make sure law-abiding firearms owners have the ability to protect and stand on guard for their homes and properties properly and lawfully. As many of them will tell us, firearms ownership is a deterrent to rural crime. We need to stand up for their rights.

The next F I want to talk about in the pathway forward to prosperity and overcoming the challenges that this budget has presented for Canadians is to make sure that we address the challenges we are finding in the area of rural connectivity, broadband access and mobility access. When budgets are put together, oftentimes an urban-centric slant is put on them, with very little consideration for those who grow our food, manufacture our goods, truck and haul our goods and develop our natural resources.

Much of our nation's GDP is harnessed by those in rural Canada, but they are an afterthought when it comes to the policy decisions the current government is making. It promised for years to increase broadband access and Internet access in rural and remote areas, with very little headway being made. I still hear and receive phone calls all the time at our office from those who are frustrated with the lack of coverage, because, again, the government has not been proactive in addressing this.

We have to prioritize the needs of rural Canadians, because it was rural Canada that built this country, and it will be rural Canada that is key to our comeback. It is time their voices are heard and considered when it comes to aspects of our budget and economic security and viability.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Exactly. They are not second-class citizens, and they should not be treated that way.

Madam Speaker, they are first-class, hard-working, wonderful people who feel forgotten by their government. However, I am glad to say that there is an awakening across rural Canada. People are recognizing we need change and are looking for this side of the House to stand up for them, and we will continue to do that.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite is no Doug Ford with his folksy witticisms.

I am continually amazed that members are conveniently confusing capital investment and operational expenses. Businesses, municipalities, families and farmers understand the difference, but there is no acknowledgement of the reality of the trade war that we are currently facing with the United States. The whole point of this budget is investing in Canada to build our economy, and to invest in our country.

Can the member opposite explain the difference between a capital investment and an operating expense?

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, I find my hon. colleague's question somewhat perplexing. I think many Canadians share in being confounded by that, in that it is a lot like voodoo economics. Spending is spending is spending. We can call it investment, or we can call it this or that, but spending is spending, debt is debt and deficits are deficits.

What we need is a government that is going to prioritize the needs of Canadians, unleash our private sector, stop standing on the backs of our industry, stop standing on the backs of our farmers, stop standing on the backs of our oil and gas sector, unleash that potential and build the infrastructure necessary to get Canadian goods to market. Then we will turn the economy around and be much more self-reliant in doing so.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague spoke at length about the cost of living. That is something that is important to us too.

When we talk about the cost of living, one of the most important things is housing. During the last election campaign, the government boasted about its Build Canada Homes project, claiming it would solve the housing problems. However, as we are seeing once again, it has failed. The Auditor General of Canada has criticized the Liberals' budget 2025. They have been slow to reduce office space. It is clear that the housing initiative will not achieve its objective.

Is this another broken Liberal promise?

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Quebec. It is a pleasure for me to speak about the budget again here in the House of Commons.

The member raises a very valid point. The priority of Canadians is cost of living, and the last thing they need is another grandiose announcement, a big promise that sets expectations high, with results never to be seen for years, oftentimes even decades. The Liberals say that someday or tomorrow they are going to do this and they are going to do that, sometime in the future, but after a while, a promise without delivery leaves people feeling hopeless and desperate.

Canadians need results and action, not just more spending and announcements. They need real results, not rhetoric. What we intend to do on this side of the House is deliver results for Canadians.

[Dalwinder Gill, Conservative, Calgary McKnight, AB]

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleague to explain why the budget does not help farmers, builders and truckers, the people who keep Canada running.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. Liberals have totally missed the mark when it comes to delivering results for Canadians. They make promises without being grounded in reality and in tangible, measurable results for Canadians.

The Liberals cannot talk down the very sectors that have helped make Canada the greatest country in the world historically. They cannot keep talking down those sectors and then expect, all of a sudden, to turn on a dime, say they are champions for Canada now and invite everyone to do business here. Canada is the highest tax jurisdiction in the advanced economy. They have put more regulations and taxes on our energy sector than in most other economies, then they wonder why they are not effective or delivering results. It is because they have misplaced priorities for years and talked down the best of the Canadian economy.

Let us get out of the way and let Canada do what it does best: produce and work.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise today on behalf of seniors in this country, both those from my community of King—Vaughan and the many seniors from coast to coast who have shared with me that they feel completely abandoned by the Liberal government's latest budget.

These Canadians expected a plan that addressed affordability, housing, health care and dignity for older adults. Instead they received a document full of slogans, empty promises and more spending, creating a deficit for which our grandchildren and their grandchildren will be stuck with the bill. It contained no meaningful action for the people who dedicated their lives to supporting us and to building this country.

The only time seniors are mentioned in the budget is through the new horizons for seniors program. I want to be clear: I support the new horizons program. It is a valuable program for community initiatives. In a time when seniors face increased isolation, stress and poor health outcomes, so many of the programs that new horizons funds help address some of these challenges. However, new horizons does not tackle the core issues that seniors struggle with today. It is not individualized support. It does not put food on the table. It does not reduce the cost of heat or rent. It does not help the widow living alone, the retired nurse rationing her medication or the senior forced to choose between heating and eating.

I recently spoke to Carole Fawcett from the group Seniors Tin Cup, an organization that supports vulnerable older adults. Carole manages her food budget, but it excludes meat and other nutritious foods. The poverty line in Canada is $25,252, yet 28% of senior women live in poverty through no fault of their own. These are hard-working Canadians, older adults who paid taxes their entire life and contributed to their communities, yet now they struggle to survive, and still the Liberal government has done nothing for them.

I also heard from Single Seniors for Tax Fairness, an advocacy group representing seniors who are widowed or divorced, or who never married. They submitted thoughtful recommendations to improve the tax system for single seniors, highlighting unfair penalties and disproportionate burdens on people living on their own, compared to coupled seniors. They called for reforms that would allow single seniors to maintain dignity and independence. These are reforms that were ignored by the Liberal government.

Seniors across the country are facing financial penalties simply for trying to support themselves. Under the current system, older adults who want to work a few hours a week are punished by clawbacks to their guaranteed income supplement or their old age security. This is not just policy mismanagement; it is a moral failure. Seniors want to continue to contribute to their community, remain active, supplement their income and maintain independence. A Conservative government would allow low-income seniors to work without punitive clawbacks. It is the right thing to do, and it is long overdue.

The financial strain is compounded by the Liberal government's failure to address the two-tier retirement system it created. I spoke with Mark Rant from Red Deer, Alberta, who has written many emails to the Secretary of State for Seniors but has yet to receive a response. We spoke about how seniors over age 75 may receive top-ups and enhanced benefits, while those between 65 and 74 years old, the group most vulnerable to rising costs, are left with nothing. Many seniors are unable to retire because of the high cost of living, yet they are financially penalized for continuing to work through clawbacks. Mark spoke about the increase for seniors aged 75 and older. This top-up has created a division among seniors in this country, and a two-tier pension system that is neither fair nor sustainable.

The wait-list for affordable senior housing in King—Vaughan is now 10 to 12 years. A senior who applies may not receive housing they can afford until they are well into their eighties. The government's budget contains nothing to shorten that wait. There is no plan to increase senior-specific housing, no emergency support for those facing eviction and no acknowledgement of the daily struggles of seniors living alone on a fixed income.

The Prime Minister once said he would be judged by the prices at the grocery store. In King—Vaughan, the consequences of government inaction are stark. Food bank volunteers reported that seniors are now the fastest-growing group relying on donated food. Sai Dham Food Bank services 3,600 seniors per month, a total of 44,000 per year. Vaughan Food Bank services 1,000 seniors per month, totalling 12,000 per year. This trend is echoed throughout the country, with Food Banks Canada reporting in its latest report that 8.3% of food bank users are seniors, which is up 22% from 2019.

This summer I was on the ground talking to seniors across this country, including in Nova Scotia. I visited Yarmouth with the member for Acadie—Annapolis. I know he used to be on this side. I do not know what happened to him. It was before he sold out his constituents. The calls I have been getting from his constituents are unbelievable.

I spoke with seniors groups throughout the member's riding, and I spoke with seniors groups in Bridgewater and in the riding of South Shore—St. Margarets. Can members guess what their biggest concern was? It was affordability. Seniors told me they could not afford to feed themselves, that they are forced to choose between heating and eating, and that energy prices are skyrocketing and food prices are soaring.

The Prime Minister continually fails seniors. At every step of a senior's daily routine, they are consistently burdened with the high cost of living due to the reckless spending of the out-of-touch Liberal government. Only a Conservative government will cut taxes, rein in wasteful spending, tackle deficits that fuel inflation and bring down the cost of living, including for seniors.

After 10 years, the government has made living as a senior in Canada harder, not easier. Seniors deserve better. They deserve dignity, security and independence. They deserve to be able to work without punishment, eat without fear and live in a home they can afford. They deserve a government that respects their contribution.

Seniors built this country. They deserve more than a passing mention of a re-announcement in the budget. They deserve more than lines at the food bank or a decade-long wait for affordable housing. They deserve a government that puts them first. The budget failed them.

The Conservatives appreciate the work seniors have done for our country, and we will always fight to ensure that they can retire in dignity and with respect.

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

Mr. Speaker, I can recall, in the 2010 by-election, knocking on doors during the German Canadian Congress. There were a number of homes in that particular block, where seniors were saying to me they cannot even afford to get the medications they require, so much so that some of them were actually eating dog food, pet food.

I want to fast-forward to our health care investments, housing investments, pharmacare investments and dental care program investments. There is the age 75-plus enhancement. We have increased the guaranteed income supplement, which lifted literally thousands of seniors out of poverty.

Contrast this with a Conservative government and the member's leader. They wanted to increase the age of eligibility for the OAS from 65 to 67. Just now the member said that they were not going to claw back the GIS. The member is saying that if someone who is collecting GIS gets a job for $25,000 a year, the Conservatives would not claw back the GIS. Does that mean they would enhance the OAS to match what they would be giving as a replacement for the so-called clawback?

In other words, their policy stinks.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member across the way obviously did not listen to what seniors have expressed to me. Had he been listening, he would have understood that seniors are working beyond the age of 67 because they do not have a choice. I visited a factory in my riding and half of its employees are between the ages of 65 and 74. Tell me why they are still working. It is because of your failed government policies that have—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I will ask the member to please speak through the Chair.

The hon. member for Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj.

[Alexis Deschênes, Bloc, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC]

Madam Speaker, I understand why the debate is getting heated, because what we are talking about is important. I am happy that my colleague is speaking out on behalf of seniors in her riding because I, too, have seniors in my riding who are contacting me and calling our offices. They tell us how hard life is for them because they do not have the ability to work to increase their income, in many cases, and they have to deal with the rising cost of living.

What does my colleague think of the request we made to the government, though we did not receive a response, about increasing old age security by 10% for people aged 65 to 74 to give them a bit of a helping hand?

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, I understand and I agree with what my hon. colleague is saying, but we have to do more than that. We have to cut taxes. We have to stop spending.

I come from a financial background and we were taught that we cannot spend more than we make. The Liberals do not understand that policy. Maybe they need to go back to school. They need to understand that if they expect balanced budgets every single day from Canadians and seniors, they have to lead by example. They are not doing that.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, my colleague spoke about the pressure seniors are under, but one thing we are both hearing about is the fear.

Could she share what seniors in her riding are telling her about the choices they have to make now and how even basic dignity is becoming unaffordable?

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, I recently visited my colleague from Cambridge's riding and we were shocked to find out that from 2015 to 2024, there was 50 million dollars' worth of scams toward our seniors. The government has done nothing to protect them.

I received a note from an individual named Kathy. She said, “Thank you for being a voice for seniors as it is heartbreaking what seniors have to endure to survive! I am a PSW and I have watched seniors insisting I don't waste [spoiled] fruit or vegetables, they will find a way to eat it! I have seen them eating one egg, splitting a piece of toast”.

I see my colleagues find this very funny, but they will not be laughing if they listen to the seniors who cannot afford to eat.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Can members have some respect while answers are being given and not laugh about something that is serious?

The hon. member for King—Vaughan.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, seniors call me because they are worried. They are worried about where they are going to get their next meal, how they are going to pay for their heat and how they are going to find the money to pay for their medications. The choices they have to make should not have to be that way. After all, they came to Canada for the promise and the opportunity to live a comfortable life.

The Liberal government needs to open its eyes and ensure that seniors can continue in this life with dignity and respect.