Debates of June 16th, 2025

Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is really unbelievable. The leader of the government is telling us, in a condescending tone, that we did not read the Liberals' election platform, in which they said they were going to do these things.

What I see this morning is that the government is in a great hurry to have an exceptionally controversial bill passed because it knows that Canadians and Quebeckers would react to any study of the bill and find it unacceptable. The Liberals want to hurry up and bypass democracy, and present the people with a fait accompli.

Nowhere in the Liberal Party's platform does it say that they would circumvent democracy and our institutions. I hope they did not have the nerve to put that in writing.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, by definition, everything that takes place here is democratic.

The member across the aisle is denouncing our bill. I suggest that he speak to the Quebec government and stakeholders in the matter, including economic stakeholders, the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal, the FTQ and the rest of the union movement. These people are united. They stand behind the opportunity to launch major projects, adopt a broad vision, create good jobs and contribute to Quebec's prosperity.

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

Mr. Speaker, we all know well, as the government House leader has explained in his opening remarks, that we had an election on April 28. Let there be absolutely no doubt that a mandate was given to every member of the House of Commons, no matter what political party, and it was that Canadians want to see a stronger, healthier Canadian economy. The leader of the Liberal Party, the new Prime Minister, with a new administration, made a commitment to pass this type of legislation by July 1. Without this form of procedure, we would not be able to achieve that. The opposition knows full well—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. government House leader.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is an extraordinary question that goes to the heart of this issue. We hear about democracy in the chamber. We just had the ultimate democratic test. Do members know what we heard?

All of us, everyone in this chamber, heard this: Get moving. Get this country moving. We need a response to the threats coming from down south. We have a plan, a Liberal plan, to put before the people and pass before July 1. That is what we are doing.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that the member for Winnipeg North just got up and said our Canadian economy is on the rocks. Guess which government has been in power for the last 10 years. It is his government.

The part that I think is more difficult for Canadians watching today is that they were sold a bill of goods. This was supposed to be a new prime minister and a new government, but the government is doing exactly what the previous government did for the last 10 years. When it did not get its way, it would ram things through the Parliament.

Please, for all Canadians, explain how the current government is different from the last 10 years of the last Trudeau government.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, guess which party has been in opposition for the last 10 years. That means the Conservatives should, I think, rally themselves to a solution, a set of solutions that would enrich Canadians in every one of their ridings, contribute to our gross national product and create opportunity for working men and women and investments in this country from coast to coast to coast. The member should look in the mirror and get behind our plan.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think we need to be clear today: The government is talking nonsense. The Liberals' election platform does not state that they will stifle democratic debate in the House, or that they will prevent the opposition parties from doing their job and studying in committee a bill aimed at giving the government superpowers.

They are proposing what almost amounts to war measures. They want to repeal their own laws, which were adopted democratically, to give up the fight against climate change and threaten the environment and Canadians' health without public debate.

That was not in the Liberals' election platform. I would like them to tell us where it says that, because no one voted for that.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I recommend that my esteemed colleague read the first page. He will not have to read much of the document. The first page explains the need to act.

The Prime Minister spoke at length of the need for the House to act. He said that, when we got here, we would introduce a bill that would receive royal assent before July 1, to give a Canada Day gift to all Canadians. This is a gift that will create wealth, job opportunities and investment in Canada.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are presenting Bill C-5, their so-called free trade and labour mobility in Canada act, as a serious effort to strengthen the economy, but once again, it is all promise and no plan. They promised homes, with none built. They promised pipelines, with none delivered. They promised a budget, which is still missing.

They have now tabled another bill filled with talking points but no mention of pipelines, no plan for infrastructure and no answers on how this will actually move our economy forward. It is the same Liberal formula: big talk, no delivery, no pipelines, no housing, no budget and just headlines.

If the government wants to unlock the economy, why are pipelines and major infrastructure missing entirely from this so-called productivity plan? Is this just another press release?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the member to the House. Hopefully, she can convey the same urgency she just conveyed in her question to her own caucus colleagues. Canada is at an economic crossroads. Canada requires measures that would provoke investment and create opportunity for working men and women right across the country. That is precisely what this bill does. I suspect the member knows it all too well but has not been able to convince her colleagues of it yet.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have been hearing my Liberal colleague say over and over again that, during the election, they promised to have the bill enacted before July 1.

I find that a little presumptuous. It implies that, during the election, either the Liberals thought that they would form a majority government, which is not the case, or they really did not take the work of members of Parliament into account in their election platform. Which one is it?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we are a minority government, and that makes the members on the other side of the House uncomfortable. It means that they have to make choices, necessary choices, choices that Quebeckers are asking us to make, choices that the other provinces are asking us to make. The unions, the business community and virtually every section of civil society are asking for this. They are urging us to take action for the economy, to respond to the United States and to create opportunities here at home. That is what we are doing.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just have a couple of simple questions. It really is quite perplexing. Who has been in power for the last 10 years? Who passed legislation that shut down pipeline expansion and development? Who put in the no tanker ban? Who brought in all these types of legislation that have constricted our economy, held back our economy and talked down our oil, gas, and natural resource and energy sector for 10 years? It was not this side of the House. It was that side of the House.

Now, all of a sudden, the Liberals want us to believe they have done a backflip and a road to Damascus and that they now believe in energy development. Can the minister please explain this to the people's House?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, to the member whose riding I know well, I very much doubt there will be a tanker going up the Saint John River anytime soon.

I will say that in New Brunswick, and right across this country, whether it be in Saint John or in any other province, major projects have been put on the table. Those major projects require our attention, and that means the member's attention too. He does not get to shirk his responsibility. I would ask him: yes or no; up or down; on major projects now, yes or no?

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

Mr. Speaker, my Liberal colleague is saying that this is written in the Liberal platform and that it is necessary. What is actually necessary is to not impose a gag order and circumvent Parliament. It reminds me of the saying that the ends justify the means. If the ends justify the means, then anything is justified, including violence and breaking the law.

This government says it is going to consult the provinces and first nations, but it does not even want to consult members of Parliament. This gag order is totally unacceptable, and I hope that every opposition member will vote against it.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, by definition, everything that goes on here involves choices and that is, by definition, democratic.

I am not sure I understand my colleague's question, but I suggest he go see the Premier of Quebec, the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, the business community and everyone in Quebec's economic sector. They are telling us loud and clear that we need to do something now.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague said, we are truly at a crossroads. Canadians made their wishes clear, and they deserve better than the kind of debate that is going on here today, which is purely aimed at providing sound bites for social media. Canadians deserve a real conversation.

I would like my colleague to tell me how the criteria in the bill ensure that consensus and the fulfillment of our environmental protection commitments are central to the bill. What are the criteria?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for raising a substantive issue, since all we are hearing this morning are questions about processes and procedure.

The member knows this very well, because she has read the text of the bill, which does not eliminate any of the requirements concerning the environment or the consultation of indigenous communities, nor does it detract from any other statute or regulation of the Government of Canada. We are accelerating, but we are not taking anything away.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I remember standing in that corner when the Liberal Party was the third party in the House and its members protested so strongly against Stephen Harper starting to use time allocation on bills. It had happened, at that point, nine times in 40 years, then it began to be every bill, but nothing from the Harper government was as breathtaking as the programming motion put forward for Bill C-5.

I ask the hon. government House leader to reconsider and respect parliamentary democracy in this place.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question. It is indeed an interesting question, for this reason. Canadians are asking this Parliament to act. They elected the Parliament they did. It is a minority Parliament. It requires parties from all sides of the House to weigh in on the substance and the issues of the day. That can mean obstruction for obstruction's sake. We had a privilege motion that lasted three months that every member on that side knew was fake.

This government will proceed responsibly, democratically and according to the rules, but it will proceed.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, this old, tired government creates imperatives with its inaction and then introduces half-empty measures. When will the government introduce that it is going to repeal the oil and gas production cap?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

It is very interesting to me, Mr. Speaker, that the Conservatives get up and decry the procedure on this very bill and then want to debate the next bill. We want to give them time to debate this bill. I am very interested as to why the member gets up and talks about other bills that may come before this House. Let us get down to business and do something for unions, for investors in this country, for investment—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Laurentides—Labelle has the floor.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as we said, this is a minority government.

Out of respect for the democratic process, I want to point out that people are watching us. A minority government requires consultations. That means going through all the democratic steps. We should keep sitting until July 15. We need to have a discussion.

We suggested splitting up Bill C-5, since there are a lot of things in it that we agree with. However, we do not intend to give the government carte blanche.