Debates of May 30th, 2025

Questions on the Order Paper

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

Mr. Speaker, I am sure you will permit me one burst of enthusiasm to congratulate the people of Edmonton. All Canadians join them in saying, “Go, Oilers, go.”

I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Conservative Party Caucus

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act, I rise to discharge my obligations as the chair of the Conservative caucus and to inform you of the recorded votes of the first Conservative caucus meeting, which took place on May 6, 2025. Division C.1 of the act requires that four votes be taken at the first meeting of every recognized caucus following a general election.

The first vote establishes whether, for the remainder of that Parliament, members may only be expelled from the caucus by means of a majority vote among their colleagues. At its May 6 meeting, the Conservative caucus voted in favour of adopting this provision.

The second vote establishes whether a caucus will elect its own chair and retain the right to replace that chair with another, also by majority vote. The Conservative caucus voted in favour of this as well.

The third vote establishes whether a caucus will give itself the authority to conduct a leadership review vote, a power that the Liberals in the 44th Parliament may perhaps have regretted not adopting. At its May 6 meeting, the Conservative caucus voted in favour of this one also.

The fourth vote establishes whether a caucus will, in preparation for the eventuality that an interim leader will be needed, give itself the authority to elect that interim leader. The Conservative caucus also voted to adopt this authority. Subsection 49.8(5) of the act specifies:

As soon as feasible after the conduct of the votes, the chair of the caucus shall inform the Speaker of the House of Commons of the outcome of each vote.

I have now discharged this obligation. I encourage the chairs of the two other recognized caucuses to rise in the House, as I have done, and, in their respective reports to the Speaker, make clear whether or not separate votes were held in each question, as subsection 49.8(2) of the law explicitly requires.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I thank the member for discharging his duties as the national caucus chair for the Conservatives.

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, and of the amendment as amended.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, while there are some measures outlined in the throne speech that can be seen as steps in the right direction, the government's agenda is clearly lacking and short on measurable actions that could produce meaningful and positive outcomes for Canadians. Moreover, the throne speech is a blueprint intended to signal the direction and focus of an incoming government. It is up to this place, the House of Commons, and all of us elected parliamentarians to review government programming with the objective of ensuring transparency and economic viability.

Let us start with the need for a budget. Households have budgets. Small businesses have budgets. Corporations have budgets. Charities have budgets. People routinely create a yearly budget as a prudent standard practice. The Liberal government's decision to not table the budget at this critical juncture for our country can best be described as irresponsible.

The Prime Minister touted his banking and business background as qualifying attributes for the office that he now holds. Can anyone imagine the response a Canadian would get if he or she were to approach their financial institution and apply for a loan with a caveat that they would provide their financial records and a budget six months after they receive the money? I would argue that the Prime Minister, his cabinet and the Liberal caucus would do well to respect Parliament and present a budget before they leave on vacation. They should not be afraid of vigorous, insightful and inspiring debate.

I want to touch on some issues that are important to my community and that were shared with me while I was campaigning. Nestled in the heart of the GTA, the beautiful municipalities of Aurora and Richmond Hill have been fraught with crime. There have been a record number of auto thefts and home invasions, and violent smash-and-grab robberies are far too prevalent. The Liberal catch-and-release agenda has frustrated law enforcement agencies across the country.

Even more glaring is the omission of investing further in the Canada Border Services Agency to provide it with the tools to catch and stop the influx of illegal drugs and guns into our country. Again, law enforcement agencies from coast to coast to coast have repeatedly told us that the majority of the confiscated weapons used in violent crimes in our communities have entered into our country illegally.

The Liberal government needs to get serious about the crime and drugs ravaging our communities. Repealing Bill C-75, which gave high priority to releasing repeat violent offenders back into our communities and avoiding jail time, would be a good start. Canadians deserve to feel safe in their communities. Sadly, the Liberal government is showing us once again that it will continue to take half measures that are weak on crime.

Speaking of half measures, the Liberals have now tabled a ways and means motion proposing three modest tax measures, but the motion does not go nearly far enough. The income tax cut, if one can even call it that, in practice, would not even cover a cup of coffee a week. The industrial carbon tax would continue to make life more expensive for businesses and consumers, and that would remain. Residents in Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill deserve better. We need a bigger tax cut that would make a real difference for their families. The entire carbon tax must be repealed so industry can excel and residents can afford to live.

One of the saddest conversations I had at the doorsteps was with a lady who confided the following: “Sir, I am not a political person. I am a widow in my eighties. My husband and I bought this home, a modest bungalow, and grew our family here. I worked all of my life, paid my taxes and am now on a modest fixed pension, but unfortunately I cannot afford to eat the same way I was eating three years ago, so I am eating less, and different things, because I want to continue living in my home.” I would ask that members of the House reflect on the gravity of that statement.

Young people are being saddled with an ever-growing national debt. Youth unemployment is once again on the rise. Liberal policies have left them with little hope for their future, and the idea of achieving home ownership is but a dream.

In closing, there is much work to do. We can all do better. The current government can start by doing a lot better than the Liberals have been doing over the last 10 years.

I would like to thank my wife Gail, my pillar of strength for the past 45 years, as well as my children, Michael and Alicia, and my extended family, for their love and support. Being here in Canada's Parliament is indeed a huge honour and one that I will cherish every day as I walk into this historic chamber.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my friend across the way.

Pierre Poilievre was the parliamentary secretary to Stephen Harper at one time. When Stephen Harper was elected prime minister, it was back on February 6, 2006. Members would not believe how long it took him to present a budget. It was not presented until May of that year.

We just had a prime minister elected, and Conservatives are taking the direction from their leader, saying that we need to have a budget. In fact, the current Prime Minister has been the Prime Minister since the election on April 28.

Stephen Harper was given far more grace than the current Prime Minister, yet look at what we have to overcome. Does the member believe it might be a bit of a double standard that is being applied?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the current Prime Minister has touted his background as a businessman and a banker as credentials for the office he currently holds. He would never loan money to somebody if they did not present their financial picture. He would never loan money to a business if it did not present a budget. It is 2025, I would remind the hon. member opposite. The Prime Minister is now asking Parliament to give him a blank cheque for $500 billion today, and then he will tell us what he has done with that money six months down the road.

It is not our money, but taxpayer money. It is my responsibility as a parliamentarian, and that of all parliamentarians, to have an opportunity to review that budget and every dollar that is spent so that we can have a say, we can have input and we can—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to give my colleague the opportunity to tell the House what he thinks the Liberal government's reasons are for not tabling a budget at such an important time in our history.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I wish I knew the answer as to why. One can surmise only that there are things the Liberals do not want us to know. Transparency is an attribute that one cannot attach to the Liberal government. We have seen over the last 10 years, and in fact just in the last Parliament, that Parliament was shut down for a number of months because the Liberals refused to provide information that parliamentarians and Canadians were entitled to. Therefore, by not producing a budget, they are raising a big question mark as to the integrity of what they are intending to do with Canadians' money.

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

Mr. Speaker, I welcome back the member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill. It is nice to see him.

I note with pleasure that the member for Winnipeg North is also reminiscing about his time served in the House during the Harper government. I recognize that the member who just gave his speech also served during that time.

Could he share with us some of his fond reminiscences from that time?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, certainly I was extremely proud to be a part of the Harper government in this time. It was a time in which we were completely transparent. Ministers presented their bills, budgets were presented on time and there was accountability. In fact, I am proud to say that our prime minister, Stephen Harper, was never called onto the carpet by the Ethics Commissioner, something that the former Liberal prime minister was quite challenged with. If I am not mistaken, it was two or three times that he had to present himself and was found guilty by the Ethics Commissioner of violations of the rules and regulations of this country. Therefore, I am proud to say that I served in the House with, in my opinion, one of the best prime ministers to have ever served this Parliament.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, my predecessor helped several municipalities in my riding apply for funding to build housing. In contrast, the Conservative leader, Mr. Poilievre, did not let his MPs help their own communities access these funds.

Will the Conservative leader continue to obstruct the efforts of municipalities represented by his MPs to build housing?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I see that the member is young. It is unfortunate that the government has created a situation in which home ownership is very difficult for young people. Certainly, paying $56 billion a year in interest is not going to provide an—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for York—Durham.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House for my maiden speech, and I wish to begin by saying I rise with equal parts pride, equal parts trepidation and a little bit of childlike wonder. I hope all three of those continue in my career here in Parliament.

I want to begin by thanking several people who have been instrumental in getting me to this place. First, I want to start with my beautiful wife, Megan. Unfortunately, she is not here with me today, because she is serving a shift in the palliative care unit at St. Mike's Hospital right now, watching from the screens there. Without her help and support and her love and guidance, I would not be in this seat. I think all parliamentarians know this is a team sport, and their spouse is the number one fan on their team and number one contributor.

I like to say there is only one person who knocked on more doors than I did during the campaign, and that is my wife. In this campaign especially, she had to work extra hard doing that because she is pregnant right now. I have been learning as a new member that we have parliamentary privilege and immunities for what we say in the House. I was thinking about disclosing the gender of our future baby, but I think even those parliamentary privileges will not protect me if I do that without her permission.

I also want to thank my parents, David and Nan Mantle, who are watching at home this afternoon. They have taught me everything I know and instilled in me many, many things, but the most important thing they have instilled in me is to do the right thing, to do the fair thing, to do the just thing, to do the honest thing, even if it is going to cost me. This is my commitment to the House, to the members opposite and to my colleagues here in the Conservative Party, that I will do that.

I also want to thank all the communities of York—Durham for putting their trust in me: the people of Brock township; the people of Uxbridge, my hometown, whom I served on council with about 15 years ago; the people of Port Perry in Scugog township, where I spent summers in Caesarea on Lake Scugog learning how to wakeboard and ski; the people of Georgina, who welcomed me with open arms; and the people of Whitchurch-Stouffville, the parts that I know very well, playing baseball against Ballantrae and Vandorf.

Of course, I also want to thank two proud first nations in my communities: the Mississaugas of Scugog Island, whose chief I have not had a chance to meet yet, but I look forward to doing that soon; and the Chippewas of Georgina Island, who welcomed me to visit Georgina Island during the campaign.

I want to share a bit of that experience. As the member for New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury will know, as he has visited often, one cannot get there; one has to take a boat, a ferry. That ferry does not run on hopes and dreams; it does not run on unicorns or rainbows. It runs on diesel fuel, which was made more expensive by the carbon tax for years by the Liberal government. I join other hon. members here in demanding that the government refund that carbon tax to the first nation.

The people and the communities I mentioned are how I got here, but they are not the full answer for why I fought to be here and why the people of York—Durham have sent me here. I think there are at least three reasons. First, homes: The people sent me here because there is a sense among my generation that they will never get ahead, that no matter how hard they work, how much they save or how diligently they budget, they will never own a home. I will just say that again for my colleagues on the other side: no matter how diligently they budget. We are still waiting for that from the other side. The dream of home ownership slipping away is creating depression and dejection among my generation.

I want to share two stories about that. The first is from a working couple in Uxbridge whose door I knocked on. Both had well-paying jobs, and they had a young family. They said they were doing okay, but they are just scraping by. They did not know what else they could be doing. They both work full jobs and try to manage their family.

Second, I received a message just earlier this week from a fellow millennial who lives in Keswick. She is being evicted from her home and lamented to me that she has nowhere to go. She said to me that she should not have to leave the town she grew up in because we cannot get enough affordable homes built for someone like her, who earns a good salary. I agree.

The government's throne speech talks about building homes. It says that a new government agency will save us, that prefabricated and modular homes are the answer. I refuse to live in a shipping container. I refuse to live in a communist-style tenement built by Brookfield Homes. I demand, for my generation, the same opportunities that my parents had before me.

The second reason that I think people sent me here is crime, crime on our streets and in our neighbourhoods. People feel unsafe. My residents do not want to have to be told to park their car in the garage or purchase military-style bollards so that their car does not get stolen.

My residents want drugs and gangs off their streets. Just this week in Georgina, the York Regional Police busted a drug ring through Project Madruga. I want to thank the York Regional Police for their diligent work there in getting fentanyl, cocaine, meth, opioids and illegal firearms off the streets. The Speech from the Throne says that the government will bring forward a renewed focus on this issue by making bail harder to get. I hope it does, and we will be watching.

Third, the people sent me here because Canada is in economic decline. They are worried about our relationship with the United States and Canada's place in the world. The data on this is not really in dispute. Growth is anemic. Purchasing power is down. Canadians are poorer than they were before. The antidote, at least in my estimation, is pretty straightforward: It is to remove taxes, remove the laws and remove the regulations that stand in the way of Canadians making a better life for themselves.

On trade, this is something I hope to contribute to positively. It is something I know pretty well, having spent nearly 10 years practising international trade with some of the best in the business. On that note, I would like to thank my former partners, Matthew Kronby and Jesse Goldman at Osler, for teaching me everything I know. My offer to the government is this: I will be a resource. If government members want to know what we are thinking on these issues, let us talk.

Canada's place in the world has been diminished because our armed forces lack the tools they need. The government says that it will rebuild and rearm the Canadian forces, and I hope that is true, but we will see. My family has a proud military tradition. My grandfather served in the Royal Canadian Air Force, attached to the RAF as a navigator during the Second World War, including on D-Day.

That tradition has been continued by my brother, who is a current serving member. I want to share my experience visiting him on a public event at his base. Unfortunately, while all the people on that base were excellent professionals and well trained, the government has failed to equip them properly. As I walked into the hangar, water fell from the ceiling into a garbage can because the roof was leaking. As we waited for rides in a military aircraft, we had to wait longer because it broke down. Although the military was prepared, even the spare broke down. Lastly, rides in the military vehicle had to stop because it blew a gasket and spread oil all over the parking lot. The state of the tools that we give our men and women in the armed forces is unacceptable, and that is something I will continue to raise in the House.

I point these things out not just because we are in opposition but because we want things to get better. Our message is fundamentally hopeful. I am here because I am hopeful about Canada's future, and if the government moves to address these and other issues, they will have my support.

I will end by asking for wisdom from heaven for this place and for all members in the House, because it is wisdom from heaven that is, first of all, pure, then peace-loving, confident, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. We are servants of the people, and no servant is greater than their master. No messenger is greater than the one who sent them. I pray that all members remember that in the House. God bless each member in the House, and God bless Canada.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I really took an interest when the member started to talk about the issue of crime and automobile theft. In the province of Manitoba, back in and around the era of 2005, 2006 and 2007, we had the highest automobile theft in the country by far. No province even came close to Manitoba on a per capita basis. In fact, we could virtually double the number of vehicles that were being stolen.

What resolved the problem was not just Ottawa. It was Manitoba Public Insurance, it was the provincial government, and it was other stakeholders that actually came together, much like what happened recently, last year in Ontario. We have seen numbers go down.

Would the member not recognize that, on that particular issue, it is not just the federal government? In fact, many would argue, in the province of Manitoba, that it was the provincial government and MPI that made the difference, that it is not just one level of government that resolves that particular problem. Would he not agree?

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member brought up co-operation. We are in a minority Parliament, and I hope the government will co-operate with us on issues that matter to Canadians. Crime is one of them. I hope that on that issue, we can collaborate on bail reform, because we know that the people stealing cars, trafficking drugs and trafficking firearms are going through a revolving door of bail.

The member talked about co-operation. The Province of Ontario has demanded bail reform, and the government has refused to give it. Where is the co-operation?

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

Mr. Speaker, during the previous Parliament, parliamentarians passed Bill C-21, legislation aimed at increasing gun control. However, since the bill passed, we have been waiting for the regulations that the government was supposed to introduce.

Does my colleague, who is concerned about safety, find it unusual that the regulations for such an important bill have not yet been introduced?

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I apologize that I must answer in English, but I commit to the House to learning as much French as I can as quickly as I can.

On this issue, I am concerned about the government's lack of priorities. It is focused on attacking law-abiding firearms owners instead of going after criminals and the criminal trafficking of guns across the border. I hope the government focuses on that priority rather than law-abiding firearms owners.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his being elected to this august chamber. Second, I would like to thank him for his family's service in the Canadian Armed Forces, particularly his brother, who is still serving.

My question is about housing. I am just wondering if the member has heard from any of the affordable housing organizations in his riding. I just got emails from a community living project that was getting funding from CMHC. It is now being told, despite Parliament having been prorogued and then dissolved so we can have a new Parliament, that apparently all the money has been spent already. Despite the government announcing billions of dollars of more deficit spending, organizations are being told, “Sorry, wait it out.”

If housing is such a priority, I am wondering if the member is hearing the same concerns about affordable housing projects in his community.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am hearing the same thing. I think it is important to recognize that my riding is both urban and rural. Sometimes people think that homelessness and a lack of housing are not rural issues, but they are. There are homeless people in rural ridings, and they have even fewer places to go.

I hope the government is being truthful and will do something about it. I hope it will give people their dream of home ownership, not a dream that cannot be attained.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his election.

He talked about his family. We on this side of the House are taking concrete action to make life more affordable for our families. This includes our tax cut. We also want to maintain programs such as pharmacare, the Canadian dental care plan and affordable child care spaces. The Conservatives voted against these programs.

Will my colleague—