Debates of May 28th, 2025

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I do believe that the leader of the Bloc party was factually incorrect. He makes statements regarding the problems of Quebec and Quebec's interests not being reflected inside the throne speech, when in fact issues like supply management are in the throne speech. Issues like Radio-Canada and CBC are inside the throne speech.

I am wondering if he would want to retract that particular comment.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, people do not change. I did not miss that.

Simply writing a word down does not make it a policy. Imagine someone trying to read a book. There would be a lot of policies in there. The throne speech includes the words “protect supply management”. I spent a lot of time explaining how that is clearly incomplete. The word “Radio‑Canada” alone does not constitute a policy. We cannot simply level criticisms at the government. However, I would appeal to those who are in a better position to make decisions. Not everything we say should be seen as a criticism, but the fact that the government has included a word in a document does not mean that it has made a fundamental commitment to the future of the nation. That is not how it works.

Appointment of Chair

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

In anticipation of the adoption of this motion, the leaders of the recognized parties consulted with me following my election. I am now prepared to propose for the ratification of the House a candidate for the position of Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole.

Pursuant to Standing Order 7, I propose Mr. Kmiec for the position of Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole. The motion is deemed moved and seconded.

It is the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

(Motion agreed to)

The House resumed consideration of the motion for an address to His Majesty the King in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, of the amendment and of the amendment to the amendment.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and address the first throne speech of a new government here in Canada. I think Canadians spoke, and they spoke well, in identifying the leader best suited to deal with the situation Canada is in today.

Before I get started, I want to provide a comment on the leader of the Bloc's thoughts. In his speech, he made reference to the fact that the throne speech did not incorporate the interests of Quebec. I found that unfortunate. I asked him a question specifically on it, and I just used two items. One was on supply management, because I know supply management means a great deal to the province of Quebec, as it does to my home province of Manitoba. Equally, CBC/Radio-Canada is an important institution. This is a government that, through the throne speech, reinforces those two policy issues.

His response to my question was that it is only writing. Writing does matter. The throne speech does matter, even though I understand that the Bloc was not interested in participating in a very significant way when the throne speech came out. I find it unfortunate. However, for the people of Quebec and the people of all of Canada, there is a great deal within the throne speech that talks about building a stronger, healthier Canada. That is what it is about.

My colleagues and I, for weeks, knocked on doors. Some of my colleagues have been knocking on doors for the last year or a year and a half, getting a true understanding of what the Canadian expectations are. Prior to the election being called, I did not know the Prime Minister. I think I met him maybe five times, at most, prior to the last election. At the end of the day, I believe Canadians got to know the Prime Minister, as I also got a better sense of the Prime Minister during the election, and they did a comparison. They looked at Pierre Poilievre and they looked at other leadership candidates, and what they saw in the Prime Minister was an individual they could actually trust and have confidence in to ensure that Canadian interests would be served first and foremost.

Whether it was Stephen Harper when he appointed the Prime Minister as the Governor of the Bank of Canada, or whether it was in England, where he was appointed to the Bank of England during a very difficult time, Canadians understood that we needed a leader who genuinely understood how to make an economy better, healthier and able to grow. Contrast that to the career politician. I am not one to criticize career politicians, as I am somewhat one myself, but Canadians did look, and I believe they made the right decision.

What we see in today's throne speech is a true reflection of what Canadians have been telling us for a long time now, over the last number of weeks. We have heard it very clearly.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my friends across the way want to talk about the carbon tax. Yes, the Prime Minister got rid of the carbon tax. Much like when Erin O'Toole—

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Excuse me, but I must interrupt. I know the member for Winnipeg North has really thick skin when it comes to this kind of thing, but this is distracting from my ability to follow the debate.

I will go back to the member for Winnipeg North.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have the right person leading at the right time, the Prime Minister we elected on April 28. When we look at the throne speech, we will see a reflection of what Canadians want to see in government.

I think of the presentation of the throne speech, and I reflect on what I heard at doors. Canadians are genuinely concerned. There is even a bit of a fear factor, and it does stem from President Trump and his comments. Trump, tariffs and trade are the three Ts, as I often refer to them.

We want to build a Canadian economy that is the strongest in the G7. I believe that we have the leadership that is going to make that happen. I believe that when we read through the throne speech, we will see we need to be patient and wait for the budget. We can look at how long it took Stephen Harper to present his budget. We need to give the Prime Minister and cabinet the opportunity to make the changes necessary in order to deal with the crisis we find ourselves in.

The budget will come in time. In the interim, we look for a sense of co-operation on the number one issue that was being brought up at doors. Members on all sides of the House recognize, I am sure, because we all knocked on doors, that people were genuinely concerned about U.S. tariffs, trade and the place that Canada was in. At the end of the day, there are initiatives that we can take that will in fact make a difference.

When the Prime Minister met with me and some members of Canada's Filipino heritage community, we talked a bit about trade. We talked about, in particular, the Philippines. In December, I was in the Philippines, where we talked about the importance of trade between Canada and the Philippines.

At the time, Mary Ng, who was the minister, indicated, working with the Philippine government, that we were interested in having some sort of formal discussions in regard to establishing some form of a trade agreement. I bring that up because, as a government, we do have a responsibility to look beyond the United States' borders and look at how we can enhance international trade.

Canada is unique in the world. We have more trade agreements than any other country on earth, with all continents. We have a golden opportunity when we look at the makeup of our country. We should be embracing our diversity and using that diversity to further advance the economic interests of Canada worldwide. The United States will always be our primary trading partner; it is just south of us, so obviously that is going to be the case. Hundreds of millions of dollars cross the border both ways every day. There is no denying the importance of the United States and getting a trade agreement where both sides can come to an agreement.

However, let us be very clear with the current administration, as our Prime Minister has been. Canada is not for sale. Canada is a unique nation in modern times that has so much to offer the world in many different ways. We see that every day by the correspondence and the world events we witness.

Canadian values are in high demand throughout the world. We are very different. I could talk about our health care system. I could talk about how we value diversity, as opposed to what takes place in the United States. The bottom line is that we have an incredible group of individuals who will work with the United States, and we will get the best deal we can for Canadians.

I referred earlier to some very difficult issues that come up when sitting at the trade table, such as supply management. The province of Quebec, the province of Manitoba and other provinces have a vested interest in supply management. I bring that up because the Prime Minister is not ignoring the provinces, territories or indigenous communities. The Prime Minister has been in consultation and working with provinces and other stakeholders since he won the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada earlier this year. We understand the true value of working with provinces. We might not necessarily be able to get unanimous support on all issues, but we at least need to try, because the dividends are very real.

Fortunately for Canadians, we have provinces, territories and indigenous communities that recognize how important it is to have one economy working in Canada. We see the value in that. It has been estimated that, if we were to be successful and all provinces got on board, and it looks as though they will, in wanting to develop that economy, we would be talking somewhere in the neighbourhood of $200 billion. That is an incredible amount of money to be found from within. I would argue that it is worth the fight.

At the end of the day, we should be working with provinces. I am very impressed by my province's premier, Wab Kinew. He has gone out of his way to ensure, in many ways, that Canadian interests are being put ahead of local interests yet protecting local interests, too. I like to see myself as Canadian first. I love Winnipeg, and I then go to the province. Those are my personal priorities, but I can say that I will fight to protect the aerospace industry in the province of Manitoba, an aerospace industry that I know is just as important in the province of Quebec. Many provinces have issues in common that we want to ensure get to those export markets.

What does trade really mean? I always like to talk about Manitoba's pork industry, because it is a great example. In Manitoba, we can go to Brandon, Neepawa or the city of Winnipeg, and we will find factories that employ thousands of Manitobans. They are processing millions of pigs every year for export markets around the world, in particular Asia and the United States.

If we were to visit the plant in Brandon, we would find a gigantic parking lot for all the people who work there. Those workers buy cars, have homes, buy furniture and go to the Tim Hortons. The direct jobs in Manitoba alone, in the factories, are estimated to be just over 10,000. That is not to mention the indirect jobs that are created. That is why tariffs matter. Manitobans understand that. If we were to put a tariff on our product going into the United States, it would mean that it would be more expensive and could cut back on the number of sales.

That is why the Prime Minister said we will focus on protecting our industries. I suggest that there are a number of industries that need to be protected. We can protect them in different ways. If we collect a tariff and put the tariff on the industries that are in danger, we can provide an incentive for them to look for other exporting markets, as an example. All provinces have some form of industry that generates jobs and opportunities and improves the lifestyles of the citizens living in that province.

However, someone needs to lead that, and I believe our Prime Minister, with the background he brings to the table, is second to no other. He has demonstrated his willingness to work with all the different stakeholders, in particular our provinces, territories and indigenous communities. That will make a difference.

I love that we had the King of Canada present the throne speech, because for me it does two things. One is that it shows that Canada is a sovereign nation. It was very symbolic. There are a number of people who are not necessarily big monarchy fans, but they saw and understood why it was important to have the King of Canada come to Canada and present the throne speech. I thought it was a wonderful thing to see the King of Canada do that. The other thing is the content itself. The throne speech provides focus for the House of Commons.

Let there be absolutely no doubt about the degree to which this government is focused on the issue of trade. In fact, we can look at the mandate letters that were sent out to our ministers. I had the opportunity to do that, as I am sure most members did. If I may, I just want to highlight some of the priorities.

First and foremost is “Establishing a new economic and security relationship with the United States and strengthening our collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world.” We will work with the United States in whatever way we can to enhance and ensure that we are protecting Canadian interests.

The second is “Building one Canadian economy by removing barriers to interprovincial trade and identifying and expediting nation-building projects that will connect and transform our country.” Through the issue that we have witnessed since January in particular, there is an opportunity. That opportunity is real and tangible. It is one economy in Canada. Hopefully, we will see what Manitoba and Ontario just recently did. There are other provinces looking to do likewise. The more we can do that, the better it is for all of us.

The other point I want to emphasize is “Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe by strengthening the Canadian Armed Forces, securing our borders, and reinforcing law enforcement.” Maybe it is because I had the opportunity to serve in the Canadian Forces, but I am glad to hear what this Prime Minister and this new government want to do: invest more in the Canadian Forces. I believe there is an obligation there. We have heard it from not only Donald Trump but many others, and Canada is not alone. There are other countries that also need to step up. However, for the first time in the last 30 years, we have a Prime Minister who is committed to doing just that, and that is something that I ultimately believe is in all of our best interests.

I love the seventh point: “Spending less on government operations so that Canadians can invest more in the people and businesses that will build the strongest economy in the G7.” Let there be no doubt that Canada, with its people and resources, is well positioned to have the healthiest and strongest economy in the G7, but it is going to take an effort that goes beyond even the Liberal Party. We need the support of opposition members, because while there is a very clear and very strong minority government mandate, it is important for us to recognize that opposition parties have a responsibility to look at ideas and thoughts and maybe even propose some ideas and thoughts. We have been known to adopt one or two of them.

I think that we have demonstrated through the Prime Minister that no one owns a good idea. Let us bring it forward. Let us demonstrate that it is in Canadians' best interest. We are looking for that type of support. I have been asked at a local restaurant how long a minority government lasts. I say that it has a lot more to do with the opposition than it does with the government.

The throne speech also talks about some things I am very passionate about: child care, pharmacare and dental care. It also talks about immigration. Immigration is my bread and butter. I love to talk about immigration.

There are so many things within the throne speech. I would hope that every member of the House of Commons makes a strong statement by getting behind this throne speech and that all of us vote yes, because it is the right thing to do.

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

Mr. Speaker, throughout the election the Liberals took many of our good ideas, and I am excited to see that. I am excited to see the GST coming off for new homebuyers. I am just wondering when they are going to announce all the pipeline projects to make us an energy superpower.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, there is the removal of the GST for first-time homebuyers, and I would like to make reference to “Build Canada Homes”, from the throne speech. I am very inspired by that aspect of the throne speech, because we are talking about Canadian technology, Canadian workers and Canadian labour, and we will be providing affordable homes. All this stuff is going to begin to be rolled out. We will see more details of it in the coming weeks and months.

Housing is a very important priority for the government. The Prime Minister has made that very clear, and as a caucus, we are all looking forward to delivering the many positive things within the throne speech that Canadians would benefit from.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your appointment. I look forward to working with you.

I am also pleased to see the member for Winnipeg North being his usual animated self. Even though we rarely agree, I look forward to working with him as well.

Earlier, in his remarks, he emphasized the phrase that the Prime Minister has repeated many times: “Canada is not for sale”. From the perspective of a Quebecker, I feel like telling him that by the same token, Quebec will not be a bargaining chip. Let me quickly explain what I mean by that.

Quebec's forestry industry has been paying tariffs since 2017. These tariffs are unfair. Currently, $2 billion from Quebec's forestry industry is sitting in the United States' coffers, yet the Liberal government has never lifted a finger to change that. Earlier, when my leader was talking about the throne speech, he said that Quebec was nowhere to be found. That is the kind of situation we are referring to.

During the election campaign, when the issue of the auto industry came up, the Prime Minister was quick to put his campaign on hold to defend Ontario's auto industry.

I have a very simple question for the member for Winnipeg North: Has he ever seen anyone in the Liberal government stand up for the forestry industry?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the short answer is yes. Whether it is the forest industry in the province of Quebec, the province of B.C. or, to a much smaller degree, the province of Manitoba, these are industries that are important. I just finished talking about using Canadian lumber or pulp. There are many different aspects of industries throughout Canada that we need to recognize.

The province of Quebec would be no more used as a pawn than the province of Manitoba or any other province would be. We are there. In Manitoba and Quebec, our aerospace industries are important. Supply management is important. In B.C. and Quebec, for the forestry industry, we are building support so that we can have an economy that works for all Canadians, and I think that is the expectation that Canadians have in every region. They want the partisanship to be put to the side and for us to focus on bringing down barriers so life can become a bit more affordable and we can all feel a bit better in regard to our future and hopefully achieving that goal of being the strongest of the G7 countries.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate you once again on being elected to the chair. I have full confidence in your abilities.

I listened with great interest and enthusiasm to the speech by my colleague from Winnipeg North. He did not have enough time to finish his thought about immigration in the Speech from the Throne. I would like to give him the opportunity to share his thoughts on the issue of immigration with the House.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I wish I had leave for enough time to talk about this issue. Suffice to say that in thinking of immigration, there are opportunities for us to look for ways to improve the system. A number of years ago, international students were students who came to Canada and would then leave. Realistically, now we have universities and provinces that have all sorts of recruitment drives that drive up the number of international students.

I have always argued that we have to look for ways to make it possible for international students and international workers to have an opportunity to become residents of Canada. I think the immigration standing committee will have a wonderful opportunity to really make a difference. We have to make sure that we get balance in the system. Right now I believe it is a little out of balance as a direct result of maybe not enough coordination between post-secondary institutions, provincial governments and Ottawa.

We are ultimately responsible. That is why I am glad that the Prime Minister has made this initiative an important one.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as a region that borders Maine, Beauce's economy is closely linked to the United States. Many businesses in my riding say more than 80% of their business comes from the United States. The U.S. tariffs on steel are hitting us hard.

What help is the Liberal government offering to affected businesses in Beauce and Canada?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is best to take this from an overall industry perspective. I understand and appreciate concerns about steel, much like forestry. They are two industries that come up far too often in regard to what I would argue are unfair trade practices. We can talk about the forest barons down south and what their intentions are. We always prevail but at a great cost.

At the end of the day, when we are talking about these renegotiated trade agreements, we need to see if we can somehow enhance protections that are not there right now. That is why I say we have opportunities. I do not like a lot of the things that President Trump has talked about, obviously, but there could be an opportunity created that would not only protect some of our industries, but ultimately see further growth. I am genuinely concerned, for example, about the auto pact industry, as well as many other industries in Canada.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to go back to the throne speech, which mentions the issue of climate change and how it is causing global disruption.

The government's proposed solution is to streamline environmental assessments and fast track projects. It talks about so-called “conventional” projects and becoming a superpower in so-called “conventional” energy. Everyone knows by now that that means oil and gas. Canada is already the world's fourth-largest oil producer and the world's fourth- or fifth-largest gas producer.

My question is very simple. At what point will the current government see itself as a global superpower? Does Canada want to become the biggest oil and gas producer in the universe before it takes the fight against climate change seriously? When will it finally get the country's dirtiest industry under control and realize that it needs to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, as Quebec has done and continues to do, even though Quebec is paying for the climate change impacts caused by the country's main source of pollution, namely oil and oil sands production?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in short, yes, the Prime Minister has talked about being an energy superpower. What the member did not say is that it would be clean and conventional energy, “clean” meaning it would be environmentally enhancing.

That is a very important aspect that is included in the throne speech itself.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is great to hear the member for Winnipeg North again. I have not been able to hear him for a solid five and a half months. It is great to hear his voice again in the House.

My question for him is quite simple. Over the last number of years, both he and I have been in this House and we have seen the government bring in countless numbers of free trade agreements. In fact, there have been more free trade agreements than all governments combined prior to ours. How important are those free trade agreements now, given the fact that we are under economic threat from our neighbours to the south?

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Very briefly, the hon. member for Winnipeg North. I am sure he has a good answer to that question.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in less than five minutes, I can guarantee.

At the end of the day, I can say that my friend is quite correct. No other government in the history of Canada has signed off on more trade agreements than we have—

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Newmarket—Aurora.