Debates of Sept. 25th, 2025

Opposition Motion—Food Taxation

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Mr. Speaker, before I get started, I would like to say I will be splitting my time with the member for Acadie—Annapolis.

It is always an honour to speak on behalf of the great people in southwest and west central Saskatchewan. I would like to take a quick moment here to acknowledge that this is an exceptional week, because on Monday, the 22nd, it was my daughter Jada's 13th birthday. We had a great celebration this weekend with her before I left.

I would also like to note that Saskatchewan is celebrating 120 years in Confederation. As a province, we built ourselves up rapidly and continue to grow through generations of hard work underneath the wide open prairie sky. People in Saskatchewan are tough enough to overcome the coldest winters and the longest droughts. Prairie resilience is a thing. We have a lot of common sense and common decency. We are surrounded by natural beauty and take good care of the land. We are the breadbasket of the world.

It is an especially good year for the Roughriders. They are having a great season, being at the top of the league at this point in the CFL.

As we give thanks for our history, we are looking ahead to accomplish more in the future. I will proudly defend the best interests of my home province of Saskatchewan, the west and all of Canada. That is what our Conservative motion today is all about.

In Saskatchewan, we are known for many things, whether it is producing the vast majority of Canada's pulse exports, leading in canola growth or weathering life in the Palliser Triangle. On that last one, I cannot express enough how much of a feat that is. In my neck of the woods, the original pioneers and settlers thought the area was uninhabitable because of the unforgiving landscape, the volatile weather and the lack of surface water. At the time, John Palliser reported that the region is a desert “which can never be expected to be occupied by settlers.”

There are two main waterways in western Saskatchewan: the Frenchman River, close to where I grew up, and the South Saskatchewan River, which is just to the north of where I live now. This is where things get interesting.

The Frenchman River flows south through southwest Saskatchewan and eventually ties into the Missouri River, then the Mississippi River and down to the Gulf of Mexico. The South Saskatchewan River, which is not even a two-hour drive north from the Frenchman River, flows north. It ties into the North Saskatchewan River up by Prince Albert, and from there it proceeds to Hudson Bay. This phenomenon is known as the Laurentian continental divide, the irony of which is not lost on me, but from our perspective out west, it is always an interesting name any time the word “Laurentian” gets mixed in there.

I talk a lot about farming because my riding is predominantly rural and heavily agricultural. My riding alone has a huge geographical area, and most of it is covered by the Palliser Triangle, which John Palliser described as more or less an arid desert and unsuitable for crops. Southwest to west central Saskatchewan falls right in the middle of the Palliser Triangle, yet for a long time now we have had farmers working everywhere with unbelievably successful crops. What happened? Ultimately, farmers settled the area and started to build their farms based on two criteria: proximity not only to the bit of water that was there but also to the rail line.

I am sure members are wondering why I am giving them a brief history lesson on Saskatchewan. It took great vision and incredibly unbreakable will to be able to build our province, our towns and our communities. Somehow the farmers managed to make it work even in the Palliser Triangle. They had a strong work ethic, combined with creativity and resourcefulness, which did the impossible. Through innovation and improved techniques, agriculture expanded and overcame major challenges against all the odds. All of this happened without any intervention from the government trying to impose its radical vision on society.

Farmers have always understood how important it is to take care of their land and respect nature, because it goes hand in hand with their success in business. They do not need to reinvent the wheel or listen to any lectures from the government. The success story of the Palliser Triangle has been happening for over a century. Over time, each new generation has built on that foundation.

There were, of course, some setbacks over time, and one in particular was the Great Depression. We saw great droughts. We saw tremendous topsoil loss because of drought, blowing winds and some of the agricultural practices of the time. It was on the recovery side of World War I, but also at the onset of World War II.

In more recent years, there has actually been less rainfall in Saskatchewan than even in the dirty thirties. We are seeing a modern miracle of higher yields. These farms are producing more with less. Soil conservation, technology and best practices have improved over time in response to the dry climate.

In the past, this happened without government intervention. Now it is happening in spite of a Liberal government that has made it more difficult for the ag industry as a whole.

The Liberals should let farmers do what they do best while they focus on resolving China's tariffs against Canadian canola products and yellow peas. It has been tragic for the farmers to do more with less and have a better harvest this year, only to watch their profits get wasted away and wiped out by tariffs. Instead of being preachy with farmers, the Liberals can learn a lot from the way farmers were able to balance the economy and the environment, and they should follow the farmers' lead. There are some other things they could learn as well.

The amount of work that went into building major projects, such as the national railway or Gardiner Dam, was done without the need of, for example, the Major Projects Office. It was a different time back then. These days, those projects that support my region of the country would probably have been built with obstacles for industry, such as the Liberals' carbon tax and other policies devastating for the west.

Today, while debating this motion, I am going to focus on the industrial carbon tax on steel, manufacturing and heavy industry. It is causing destruction among many of our once great companies. Previous and current Liberal policies are having devastating impacts on companies. For example, Evraz steel in Regina had to cut its labour force in half, largely thanks to bad Liberal policy, which has made sure that no projects can proceed in Canada. While these industries already have to deal with tariffs, the Canadian government is still taxing them more at the same time.

The Liberals across the way should ask themselves whether it makes sense to put another tariff, basically, on top of the tariff already hitting Canadian companies. If they would start to think of it that way, maybe they would finally support Canadian jobs and drop their industrial carbon tax. If there are no major projects to build in Canada, then no Canadian steel is needed, which means fewer jobs. We then add on the industrial carbon tax, which has an impact on these companies up front.

There is also a trickle-down impact for other parts of the economy and for the great farm machinery manufacturers on the Prairies as well. I spoke with a general manager of one of these great companies the other day, and he talked about how the industrial tax is devastating for many reasons.

However, it is not just Canada that has one. I recognize that other countries around the world have them, but those are countries that have to import products in order to build the products they make. The industrial carbon tax is largely a hidden cost for them. It is one that they have to bear. It is also one that they then have to pass along to the consumer, so the consumer has to pay higher prices.

The costs of producing food and taking care of cattle are borne by the producers. Eventually, the people in the grocery store will then have to pay higher prices. What it takes to build key infrastructure in this country shows an impact of bad policies like the industrial carbon tax.

The problem begins with the Liberal government, which has an attitude that says, “For everything else in life, there is a taxpayer,” or “Tax first, ask questions later”. That sets the tone from the beginning, but there is always a cost in doing that, and it eventually gets passed down to the consumer. The difference is that, unlike a greedy government, Canadian businesses are forced to charge more while trying to survive. At the end of the day, the consumer gets hit from all directions. We are talking about ordinary Canadians, who have to pay higher prices through inflation and then turn around and pay higher taxes on everything else. At every stage, the government benefits, but everyone else is worse off.

I know the Liberals are going to stand up and say they scrapped the carbon tax, and they sort of did. They scrapped the consumer tax that people paid on their home heating and fuel to fill up their vehicles, but as I explained, the industrial carbon tax is truly a consumer carbon tax by another name. Not only did the Liberals keep it, but they are raising the rate for this industrial carbon tax.

Here is something else to think about: The industrial carbon tax was matching the consumer carbon tax, which added 17¢ per litre before it was removed. If the consumer carbon tax continued to go up, it would have been adding 21¢ per litre. Even though that is not happening right now, the industrial carbon tax went up, and it is spreading those increased costs throughout the economy in place of the consumer tax. However, it is a hidden cost because we are dealing with food inflation, a cost of living crisis that is being borne by our manufacturers, by the consumer, by our farmers and by people who are the ones to create jobs in this economy. It is devastating.

It is time for the Liberals to vote for our motion, which would get rid of the industrial carbon tax.

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

Mr. Speaker, having grown up on the prairies, the very first farm I ever visited was Stoin farm around the Moose Jaw area.

I concur with many of the statements the members put on the record here this afternoon in regard to how important the role is that our farmers play in providing food, not only for the people in the Prairies but for all of Canada. In fact, we feed the world in many different ways.

We have a national government, particularly a minister of agriculture, that is very aggressively working with the farming communities in terms of what we can do to ensure that we capture a larger percentage of the world market. This includes canola, which is so important to Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Could I have the member's thoughts on that?

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, agriculture is very much a trade-exposed, global market-driven industry. To resolve the tariffs, the Prime Minister has to get involved.

Beyond that, as I was alluding to in my speech, the cost of everything at the farm gate has gone up, and it is innovations by farmers that have largely driven progress in agriculture, whether it is on the manufacturing side or in best farm practices. The issue with the industrial carbon tax is that it is a hidden cost for producers when they have to buy their next piece of machinery. It is also a cost on transportation because road equipment and the production of pavement and concrete, things like that, are exposed to the industrial carbon tax. It creates a problematic scenario for them.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bank of Canada, the undisputed authority on inflation, estimated that the planned increase in the carbon tax this year would have raised prices by 0.1% in Canada in the provinces where the tax applied. I would remind the House that it did not apply in Quebec.

In Quebec, the projected increase was 0.01%, which is marginal. That is one-hundredth of 1%, or one cent per $100 purchase. We are talking about groceries here.

I would like to know if my hon. colleague has the same figures, since the Bank of Canada had been very clear that this was not a big deal.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the problem the member is ignoring is that Quebec does not produce every single thing it needs within the province. Quebec, like Canada, has to import goods. If goods coming from European countries have an industrial carbon tax or if things coming from elsewhere in Canada are impacted by the industrial carbon tax, people are going to pay it. It may not show on the invoice, but it is baked into the price, as I said in my speech.

That has been long noted by many people. Because it is a hidden cost, we cannot fully quantify what it is doing because the number is not immediately available, but we can see how the costs keep going up. As the manufacturers have to pay their bills, they can see it, but they do not show that number when they have to increase the cost of products they are sending out the door for consumers.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and next-door neighbour from Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley. He is a great representative not only of his riding but of the province of Saskatchewan and Canada.

My colleague brought up the carbon tax, and the Liberals seem to think it has gone away. What I have witnessed is that the carbon tax has been downloaded to other levels of government. It was downloaded to the provinces through school boards and hospitals, which had to collect and pay the carbon tax. It was also downloaded onto municipalities, where there were increased rates for municipal facilities.

What are the member's thoughts on that? Does he think the Liberal government is going to return that money to the taxpayer?

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate this question from the most notorious member in the House of Commons. He is a great friend, and he is a terrific MP for his region.

We had a terrible problem of municipalities not being able to get that money back. We know the feds are not going to do it because they have a rabid ideology that is going to prevent that from happening. They want to see these municipalities punished, because that drove the need for them to implement the carbon tax in the first place.

It has made life way more unaffordable for people in rural Canada because we have greater distances to travel, whether for personal, business or industry reasons. It is a huge problem. The industrial carbon tax is a big problem for RMs as well, with the heavy equipment they use and the big projects they—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Acadie—Annapolis.

[Chris d'Entremont, Conservative, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley for sharing his time.

It has been three years since I have had the opportunity to speak to an opposition day motion in the House, because of my previous duties as a chair occupant. First, let me say how proud I am to stand here today to represent the magnificent riding of Acadie—Annapolis. I thank my constituents for their continued support.

My campaign team and volunteers are the best. It is thanks to them that we have succeeded three times since 2019. I thank my family: my wife, Anne, and my sons, André and Alec, for their unwavering support through my political career. Of course, I thank my mom and dad, who are probably watching tonight, for all their support. I thank my awesome staff in the Yarmouth office, Joellen and Krista; Agnes, who was in my Kingston office; Esther, who is there now; and my two staffers here on the Hill, Isabelle and Mikhail, who are phenomenal and make our office rock.

I want to thank volunteers. As members know, in southwest Nova Scotia, in my riding of Acadie—Annapolis, we have had a pretty bad fire season. We had the largest fire ever in Nova Scotia this year. I want to thank the volunteers, the municipality of Annapolis, the Province of Nova Scotia, the firefighters and the first responders for all their awesome work on the Long Lake wildfires complex; almost 8,500 hectares burned, 20 houses were lost and folks in West Dalhousie were out of their home for over 40 days. They got back just a few days ago.

Can anyone imagine losing their house or being out of their house for over 40 days? On behalf of everyone here in the House of Commons, I want to wish them well and let them know that we are thinking about them and hopefully helping them as time goes on as the province finally figures out exactly what it is going to be asking of the federal government when the time comes.

On another note, I want to thank everyone for their well wishes for a speedy recovery from my broken collar bone. I unfortunately relearned something very important from elementary school, the first law of inertia: that an object will continue in motion with the same speed and the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced external force. I was the object, and the bike path was the unbalanced external force.

I want to thank everyone who wished me a speedy recovery.

Now let us get into why we are here today. I want to speak in support of the Conservative motion, because Canadians are hurting. Families are being forced to cut deeply into their grocery budget just to get by, and frankly, that makes me a little bit angry and a little bit sad.

Canada is a wealthy country, but under the current Liberal government's mismanagement, taxpayers are feeling the pinch and their hard-earned money is being wasted.

In southwest Nova Scotia, where I have lived my entire life, people work hard. They want to own a home, feed their children and provide a good education for them, and maybe take a vacation every once in a while. However, since 2015, everything has changed.

Since I was first elected here in 2019, the cost of living has skyrocketed. Even then, families in West Nova, as it was called at the time but is now Acadie—Annapolis, were struggling. We warned that the Liberals' out-of-control spending and massive deficits were irresponsible, but of course they did not listen. Now, after six months under a new Prime Minister, who promised financial discipline, Canadians are still waiting. He said that he would be judged by the costs at the grocery store. Well, Canadians are judging him, and they are not impressed.

Instead of delivering relief, the government delayed its budget. We are still waiting for a budget; we have not seen one in a year and a half because the Prime Minister is projecting a deficit of over $92 billion. That is a monstrous, irresponsible burden on future generations. We will hear, I am sure, maybe in the questions, that they are talking about a “generational investment”, but really it is a generational debt that my kids, their kids and their kids' kids are going to have to try to pay in one way or another, one that causes inflation and extra costs to future generations.

While the government boasts about withdrawing the carbon tax, it left in place the industrial carbon price on fertilizers and farm equipment. That is not relief; that is just politics. The result is that food inflation is 70% higher than the Bank of Canada forecast. Since the Liberals came to power, food prices have risen by 40%. We have heard it many times here today. It is deliberate, and it is unacceptable. It is inhumane for a G7 country. We are a rich country. We are a food basket of a country. We can produce all the food for many people in the world, and we can barely feed ourselves, for some reason.

People find themselves pinched. They are having to make tough decisions on whether to feed their children, heat their homes or buy the things that school requires, and then get their kids into sports, if they are lucky. Unfortunately, the food basket is far too expensive. In my riding, food banks are overwhelmed, and I am sure food banks across Nova Scotia are experiencing the same thing. Food bank usage is up 142% across Canada. While the government claims to be putting money back into taxpayers' pockets, it continues to take it away through many other means. Low-income Canadians spend more of their income on essentials such as food and rent, yet these items are the fastest rising in price. Where is the relief?

In my province of Nova Scotia, the situation is dire. In 2023, 28.9% of the population faced food insecurity. In 2024, that rose to 29.3%. It did not get better; it got worse. There are 71,000 children living in food insecure households. Feed Nova Scotia, which supports many of the food banks across Nova Scotia, supports 23,000 people monthly. That is a 52% increase since 2022. These numbers are heartbreaking. They demand action. We must protect our food sovereignty.

It is difficult in Nova Scotia. Lots of things can be produced in the Annapolis Valley, up near Truro and into Cape Breton, but a fair amount of stuff has to be trucked in from other parts of the country. We need to support the farmers we have. We need to support farmers across Canada. We need to support our producers, and we need to support truckers so product gets to our grocery stores. Once again, it is the taxpayer who ends up paying. It is the people going to the store who are finding all of these things to be far more expensive and, most times, out of reach when they need them.

I would be remiss if I did not bring up the challenges that face the main economic driver in my riding. That is the fishery and, more specifically, the lobster fishery. Last season was a tough one. A number of new entrants did not make it because of the expense of everything. Some of it revolves around tariffs, but some of it revolves around input cost and taxes. I could spend a couple of hours on how fishers feel that the government is doing its best to make sure that the whole fishery fails. Rather than the fishery being treated like the safe and healthy food source that it is, it is being squeezed by competing federal initiatives that do not take into consideration coastal communities, which are a long way from a lot of the services in urban areas, but that are providing safe food products for consumption. When we add up all of those things, and it is not unlike what farmers are telling us, it is very difficult to make ends meet.

This Conservative motion calls on the government to eliminate the carbon tax on fertilizer and farm equipment. It is not just policy, it is survival. We need affordable food. We need responsible governance. We need to stop taxing the grocery basket. We need to do everything within our powers as legislators here in the House of Commons to ease the burden that Nova Scotians and Canadians are seeing at the grocery store. What has been happening is absolutely the opposite.

I urge members to vote with us. Let us work together. We hear a lot of that here in the House of Commons, especially from the government side, where members say that we should just work with them. A number of suggestions have come from the opposition side, whether from the Conservatives, the Bloc or other opposition members, for finding ways to work with the government, but the government continues to close its ears and not listen to the good ideas that come from opposition members. Let us work together for Canadians, our economy and our future.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very encouraged to have heard both the hon. member and his Conservative colleague who spoke earlier refer to the impacts of climate change in their addresses before the House. It is a refreshing change. We hear a great deal of criticism from our Conservative colleagues about, more or less, every climate change and emissions reduction policy that the government has undertaken.

I would love to hear from the member what suggestions he would put forward for how, in his community, in his riding and in Atlantic Canada, we could implement policies that would address the root cause of climate change and improve adaptation to climate change in a way that the member would find acceptable.

[Chris d'Entremont, Conservative, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

Mr. Speaker, quite honestly, in the Annapolis Valley, we are having a tremendous drought problem, and we need to be resilient to those things, which will continue to happen over the next number of years. We need to have adaptation programs to be able to support farmers in growing the products that we need for our grocery shelves.

The second thing that I would suggest to the hon. member, as we put good ideas on the table, is climate resilience at our wharves. We know that food products coming from the sea are extremely important. We have wharves that are being abandoned because the boats cannot tie to them, so we need to have an infrastructure program that would recognize the impacts of climate change and make infrastructure stronger and more efficient for future use.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing my colleague and I agree on, it is the mismanagement of public finances. That is clear.

The government is being led by someone who presented himself as the great banker-in-chief during the last election campaign. He boasted about being able to control public finances. What we saw, however, was someone who deprived the government of revenue by lowering taxes and forgoing revenues from GAFAM. He turned down revenue while announcing investments. The upshot is that he is dragging his feet on tabling a budget, and the figures we are hearing make no sense. People are talking about a nearly $100‑billion deficit. Who knows what we are headed for on November 4.

How can the government ask people to tighten their belts or expect the middle class to struggle while neglecting public finances?

[Chris d'Entremont, Conservative, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the challenge that all governments face is to provide a bit of certainty when it comes to the economy, along with sensible budgets that are presented on time and respond to needs. However, they have to avoid spending all the money on all sorts of less important projects. The government cannot solve all the problems of all people.

I hope to see a balanced budget. That will not be the case this fall, but I would like to see a budget containing sound economic decisions in the spring.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, what we are debating today is the fact that the Prime Minister made a promise that Canadians would judge him by the cost of food at the grocery stores. Instead of focusing on that, the Liberals have pivoted to this thing around affordability and a focus on food being available on a national blanket level through schools.

One of the members across the way made a comment, and I would like the member to respond to it. He basically said that parents should be thankful because they are saving $200 a month on groceries because the Liberals are spending their tax dollars on a program that is basically blanketing the whole country, whether or not that is the best way for them to help parents be able to feed their children.

[Chris d'Entremont, Conservative, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member asked that question because, while the school food program is needed in some communities, what has happened in Nova Scotia is a bit of a shame because, when the province takes a hold of things, it tries to standardize those things across the country.

I look to a nice elementary school in Cornwallis. There was a community group that was providing meals to students. The provincial program came in, kicked out all of those volunteers, who had been doing such a great job, and half the kids are putting it in the garbage. Providing that centralized system does not provide meals to all children. What we should be doing is helping their parents and helping our communities get fresh food into their bellies, because it is more important that children eat at home than all this crazy stuff that they are doing in the schools.

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

I thank all members of the House for their shared commitment to food security and to Canada's farmers and food processors.

Our new government is committed to ensuring that prices remain affordable for Canadians. It has made this a top priority. In the face of unprecedented and unfair trade threats, we are working hard to strengthen and grow Canada's economy and jobs, for the benefit of all.

As the Prime Minister said, we are working to build the strongest economy in the G7. Agriculture plays a very important role in this regard. It is time for our agriculture and agri-food sector to get the credit it deserves as an important driver of our economy. In fact, when we look at the agricultural and agri-food system as a whole, we see that it is an economic powerhouse. This sector employs 2.3 million people, creates one in nine jobs, generates more than $100 billion in exports, and contributes $150 billion to the GDP. A strong agriculture and food sector that puts Canada first is essential to Canadians' food security and the affordability of the prices they pay.

This is the time of year when farmers are very busy. In fields and on farms across Canada, it is harvest time. Every day across our great country, nearly 200,000 farmers and their family members are out in their fields and barns well before sunrise, working hard to put fresh, nutritious food on our tables. Together, they have helped establish Canada as a global leader in sustainable food production.

In 2024, Canada was the world's fifth-largest exporter of agri-food and seafood products. Our food processors also play a vital role. They are our farmers' biggest customer, purchasing more than 40% of Canada's agricultural production for domestic processing, while creating more jobs than any other manufacturing sector in the country. There is incredible potential on the horizon for our world-class food and agricultural products, potential that could help support global food security.

The hon. Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food brings an economic and competitive perspective to agriculture and food. We want a food system that is strong, affordable and resilient for Canadians and that supports our world-class farmers and processors. All in all, we are working to expand and strengthen our trade relations with key markets; unlock Canada's potential by reducing red tape; and invest in technology, innovation, and artificial intelligence. We are strengthening trade with our existing customers, while opening up new opportunities in sectors with high potential. Our farmers and processors provide consumers around the world with the best agricultural and food products available, while supporting the Canadian economy.

A strong and prosperous agriculture and food sector means a more resilient food system for Canadians. A few weeks ago, the federal, provincial and territorial agriculture ministers met to discuss the next agricultural policy framework and advance collaborative efforts in support of a resilient, sustainable and competitive agricultural sector. Throughout the conference, discussions focused on ensuring that business risk management programs are sustainable and reflect the needs of producers.

We are actively seeking new international opportunities while working to resolve issues around access to other key markets. It is also important to note that we are building a united Canadian economy thanks to improved domestic trade. I would add that the Government of Canada made regulatory changes that ceased the application of the fuel charge in effect since April 1, 2023. Thanks to these changes, charges on fuel destined for the agricultural sector are now fully exempt from the federal price on pollution.

We also know that sustainable food packaging is a priority for consumers, along with affordable food. That is why Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is working closely with Environment and Climate Change Canada, in partnership with the food industry, to gain a better understanding of food packaging approaches that reduce the use of plastic while limiting the impact on the food industry or consumers.

I would like to take a moment to talk about the food policy for Canada and one of our flagship initiatives: the local food infrastructure fund.

Over the past five years, the fund has committed $71 million to nearly 1,200 projects to improve food security across Canada, including more than 250 projects in indigenous communities, or about 40% of total funding. These projects included community gardens, greenhouses, walk-in refrigerators and walk-in freezers, as well as refrigerated vehicles for transporting and distributing food. We have invested nearly $63 million over three years in renewing and expanding this program to help community organizations across the country invest in local food infrastructure.

The food policy for Canada also recommended a national school food program. We are investing $1 billion over five years, which should allow us to provide meals to some 400,000 children every year. The program is expected to save the average participating family with two children up to $800 per year in grocery costs, with low-income families benefiting the most. The program connects schools to local food organizations, while creating opportunities for farmers, food processors and harvesters across Canada.

Most importantly, the program will allow kids to be kids and will relieve parents of some of the pressure they are under. Our $1‑billion investment includes over $20 million for the first-ever school food infrastructure fund. Investments made through this fund help ensure that organizations have the equipment and infrastructure they need to produce, store and distribute safe and healthy food to school children across the country. It is truly a community-based approach. Funds will go directly to nonprofit organizations. They, in turn, will direct them to local organizations that know better than anyone else what their community needs, whether it be kitchen suppliers or delivery vans to transport food to schools. This funding will help cover some of the infrastructure costs.

Other measures have been taken since the beginning of this period of global economic fluctuation. At the end of last year, we passed the Affordable Housing and Groceries Act in the House. This legislation allows the Competition Bureau to move forward with its investigations into the use of anti-competitive restrictions, known as property controls, by large retailers. Ultimately, the Competition Bureau's work will lead to healthier competition in the food retail sector.

Statistics Canada, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada have also developed the food price data hub. This is a new all-in-one tool that consolidates existing data to make it easier for Canadians to get an overall snapshot of food prices and trends. It includes average retail prices, staple food items, a personal inflation rate calculator, and other tools that allow Canadians to verify the accuracy of prices at the checkout.

In conclusion, food security is a concern both globally and locally. We must continue to support and invest in farmers, hunters, gatherers and processors, as they are essential to Canada's economy and food security.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

Mr. Speaker, all day today, we have been listening to Liberals talk about food affordability in response to our opposition day motion, but to me it is déjà vu all over again. I have been here for six years and have been hearing Liberals go on and on about how a program is finally going to solve the inflation problem and deal with, for example, housing, infrastructure, supply chain resilience and our lagging economic productivity measures. Today, we are hearing that the Liberals finally have a program to solve food affordability, yet food inflation is up twice the rate of the consumer price index, and demand at food banks is soaring.

Why should Canadians have any confidence at all that the Liberals are going to solve the food inflation problem?

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his pertinent question, which is relevant.

It is important to note that inflation has not only affected Canada. It has also affected many countries around the world. The issue of being proactive or reactive is very important in the response.

I spoke about programs, which are aspects that are much more reactive. However, when we work directly with organizations and when we dedicate funding to a particular matter, it is much more proactive. In my view, the current government led by this Prime Minister is a government that is much more proactive and that can deal with this type of situation.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have been debating inflation and rising food prices all day. As I said to a Conservative member earlier, this is an interesting and important topic because it is true that individuals and families are having trouble making ends meet.

One thing is bothering me, though. We are not talking about how seniors who receive only old age security and the guaranteed income supplement are losing their buying power.

I do not know if the member is aware, but that adds up to about $1,700 a month. How can any senior survive on that? How can they cover rent, food—which has gone up so much because of inflation—and medication on $1,700 a month? Many of these people were not blessed with private insurance plans or a collective agreement that included a private pension plan.

Does the member agree that it is time to increase old age security for—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

I have to give the hon. member a little time to answer.

The hon. member for Bourassa.

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for that very relevant question.

Am I aware of the situation? Yes, I am. In my riding, Bourassa, between 25% and 30% of the population is seniors. I think that is a very important point. Inflation has had a much bigger impact on seniors. I am sure of that, and I could not agree more with my colleague.

Now, should we increase OAS or should we try to lower prices? I will let the Minister of Finance present his solid budget. I hope it will take seniors into consideration. I completely agree with my colleague.

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

Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to hear my colleague talk about the importance of agriculture in his speech.

In my riding, Madawaska—Restigouche, there are vegetable farms, as well as farmers who grow potatoes in the Grand Falls area, and poultry farms in Upper Madawaska.

I would like my colleague to talk about the importance of the measures we have taken to save agriculture, not only in rural ridings like mine, but across the entire country.

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, many programs have been mentioned.

I would like to thank my colleague for giving me another opportunity to talk about the programs we want to implement. While we do need to help farmers and recognize the importance of farmers and agri-food, I think it is very important to look at the end of the supply chain. We must ensure that food produced in Canada reaches Canadian tables at an affordable price.

I think this government has a much more systemic overall view, which is very important and will enable us to address this issue seriously. This will allow us to help our farmers and, at the same time, ensure that Canadians have access to food at truly affordable prices.

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

Mr. Speaker, today we are debating a motion that, under the guise of legitimate concerns about the cost of living and food security, unfortunately proposes a vision that I would describe as simplistic and disconnected from Canada's economic and social reality.

This motion ignores the global economic context. It also ignores the tangible, meaningful and responsible efforts our new government is making to make life more affordable, protect families, support workers and build a sustainable future. This is not an abstract debate, but one about the well-being of millions of Canadians who rely on smart, thoughtful, balanced and forward-looking public policies.

In the last election, Canadians chose to elect a Liberal government that has a clear, responsible and ambitious plan to protect and grow our economy. They gave us a clear mandate: to build a stronger, more resilient economy.

In response to concerns about the cost of living, our government has taken decisive action by implementing concrete measures to ease the tax burden on Canadians. We have lowered taxes for nearly 22 million people. This means that millions of families now have more money in their pockets, a measure that has a direct impact on their daily lives.

We removed the GST for first-time home buyers. Purchasing a home is one of the most important investments a family will make. By removing the goods and services tax on homes worth up to $1 million purchased by first-time buyers, we are making it easier for many families to buy a home and helping them build their future. We also got rid of the consumer carbon tax, again demonstrating our commitment to reducing its direct cost to households.

These concrete, practical measures clearly demonstrate that our government is paying attention to Canadian families and taking action to improve their daily lives. The Conservatives, on the other hand, have consistently voted against measures designed to make life more affordable, whether in terms of expanding dental care, pharmacare or historic child care funding agreements.

The Liberals introduced affordable child care. Since 2021, more than 900,000 children have benefited from quality child care services. On average, this saves families thousands of dollars a year. By protecting and strengthening this program, we are enabling many parents, especially mothers, to balance work and family life, thereby strengthening the workforce and the national economy. Our Conservative colleagues voted against that. We know that when families are strong, the economy is strong, and we are making Canada strong.

The Liberals also introduced the Canada child benefit, which helps families provide for their children. Since its introduction in 2016, nearly 650,000 children have been lifted out of poverty. For example, more than $40 million per year is paid out to families in my riding of Madawaska—Restigouche.

In addition, we have expanded eligibility for the Canadian dental care plan to all age groups in order to help families cope with the cost of living. Now, approximately 8 million Canadians can benefit from affordable dental care, saving them an average of more than $800 per year. This is another meaningful step forward in improving the health and well-being of our constituents.

We cannot talk about affordability without talking about food security. Our government has implemented concrete programs to combat food insecurity. For example, we invested $1 billion over five years in a national school food program that will help another 400,000 children get nutritious meals at school. This program ensures that children do not have to get through their school day on an empty stomach.

We have reached agreements with every province and territory. For example, in my home province of New Brunswick, we will invest over $11 million to expand access to school meal programs, which will help more than 57,000 additional children.

The official opposition leader has been against school meals since day one, just like he is against affordable child care. Cynically, he says that the school food program is being used to feed bureaucracy instead of children, but we can confidently say that hundreds of thousands of children are benefiting from healthy meals at school.

Because we recognize the critical importance of food security, we will also be introducing more measures in the coming months. We are going to invest in greenhouses. Hydroponics and other agricultural activities in a controlled environment enable us to grow more types of food here in Canada.

We are going to improve the resilience of food supply chains and support innovation. We are going to change the mandates of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the Pest Management Regulatory Agency to ensure that food safety and the cost of food factor into all of their regulatory decisions, without compromising health and safety.

We are also determined to maintain Canada's commitment to supply management and the sectors it covers, including dairy, poultry and eggs. This system protects Canadian jobs and ensures the stability of our food supply in the face of fluctuating production costs, while guaranteeing farmers a minimum price for their products. The supply management system is especially important in my riding, where poultry farms play a critical role in Upper Madawaska's economy. As a matter of fact, I represent Saint‑François‑de‑Madawaska in the House; it is known as the chicken capital.

Contrary to what the motion suggests, our government takes its fiscal responsibility very seriously. We have been very clear that our new government is focused on fiscal discipline. Over the next three years, we will balance operating expenses while reducing the debt-to-GDP ratio. Canada maintains a AAA credit rating, an international rating that reflects investor confidence in our economy. This confidence is crucial to attracting the investments needed for our growth.

Our approach is based on a comprehensive review of departmental spending to eliminate inefficiencies and duplication, while maintaining transfers to provinces and individuals. This responsible management aims to reduce day-to-day operating expenses, while investing more in the priorities that will build the economy of tomorrow.

Budget 2025, which we will present on November 4, embodies this clear vision. Our aim is to transform our economy through ambitious investments, but also through rigorous discipline. This budget will support affordable housing, modern infrastructure, government modernization and public-private partnerships to catalyze significant investments.

With this budget, we will address the real concerns of Canadians. For example, this summer, many citizens and municipal officials from across my riding told me about the housing needs in their communities. We have heard that message. Thanks to our new government's ambitious housing plan, which will be delivered through “build Canada homes”, housing starts will accelerate across the country, leveraging Canadian technology, Canadian workers and Canadian softwood lumber.

Our objective is clear: to build the strongest economy in the G7, to ensure the prosperity of Canadians and to protect our planet. On that note, I would also like to remind my opposition colleagues that fighting climate change is not only a moral imperative, but also an economic imperative. Global demand for low-carbon technologies, sustainable resources and climate-resilient infrastructure is growing rapidly. Canadian businesses are already leading the way on implementing these solutions. By incorporating climate considerations into our economic planning, we drive innovation, open new markets and position Canadian businesses as global leaders. This is how we secure a sustainable future for our children while seizing new economic opportunities.

Our government has made courageous and responsible decisions that balance the urgency of making life more affordable against the need to prepare for a sustainable future. We have lowered taxes for the middle class, supported families, strengthened food security, and we are investing in innovation. I am proud of our new government. It understands the importance of a strong economy to make life more affordable and it is guided by the principle that the economy can only be strong if it works for everyone.

Canada elected us to build a stronger country, and that is exactly what we will do.

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

Questions and comments.

I will do the member the honour of attempting to pronounce the name of his constituency correctly. The hon. member for Louis‑Saint‑Laurent—Akiawenhrahk.