House of Commons Hansard #153 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was culture.

Topics

line drawing of robot

This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Petitions

Alleged Premature Disclosure of Information Concerning Bill C-39—Speaker's Ruling Members hear the Speaker rule that a media-only briefing on the Pacific Link pipeline policy does not constitute a prima facie breach of privilege, though members should receive timely information. 600 words.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural Sector Members debate the Bloc Québécois motion urging the government to uphold CRTC levies on streaming services and deliver a promised $600 million to the cultural sector. Bloc and NDP MPs argue the levies would make digital platforms contribute to supporting Quebec and Canadian culture, while Liberals say court challenges blocked payments and defend direct funding and a new policy approach. Conservatives question the cost and the government’s record of delivering its commitments. 43900 words, 5 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.

Alleged Mis-characterization of Members' Remarks Members debate a privilege complaint over remarks describing opposition to Bill C-39 as a “wild disinformation campaign,” with the NDP arguing the comments impugn MPs’ integrity and the Liberals saying the complaint is untimely and based on conjecture. 900 words, 10 minutes in 2 segments: 1 2.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives criticize the government’s immigration management and rising food costs, while challenging its decision to award a CRA security contract to a U.S. firm over a Canadian organization employing veterans. They demand action to protect steel and aluminum jobs, question losses tied to Lion Electric funding, and call for fiscal and policy changes to address affordability.
The Liberals defend sustainable immigration and the contributions of newcomers, while highlighting support for affordability through the groceries benefit and fuel-tax relief. They defend the CRA’s security contract, promote major projects and investment in Canadian industries, and emphasize skilled-trades training and jobs.
The Bloc condemn Bill C-39, citing threats to environmental protections, Indigenous rights and the right to strike, and urge Liberals to oppose it. They also criticize the exemption of American streaming giants from cultural levies, arguing taxpayers are left to cover the cost.
The NDP oppose Israeli firms’ acquisitions and challenge Bill C-39 over threats to workers, the environment and Indigenous peoples.

Canada Labour Code Second reading of Bill C-247. The bill would repeal section 107 of the Canada Labour Code, which allows the federal government to intervene in labour disputes and limit strikes. Supporters say this protects workers’ charter rights and bargaining power; the Liberal speaker argues that safeguards and mediation reforms are preferable to repealing the provision. 5200 words, 35 minutes.

Adjournment Debates

PrescribeIT compensation scandal Michael Cooper says the failed $300-million PrescribeIT program delivered little, left $200 million unaccounted for, and paid CEO Michael Green large bonuses and a $1-million severance package. Corey Hogan says the health minister acted upon learning of the issue and an independent review is underway. Cooper challenges the ministers’ oversight; Hogan points to the review and the Auditor General’s view.
Building energy projects Pat Kelly says Liberal policies and laws have blocked development and urges their repeal, criticizing the cancellation of Northern Gateway and the cost of the Trans Mountain expansion. Corey Hogan argues that regulatory reform and collaboration can enable projects, cites increased oil production and pipelines under construction, and says Northern Gateway’s consultation failures and TMX’s costs reflect lessons learned.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

David Myles Liberal Fredericton—Oromocto, NB

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very pertinent question.

As I said earlier, the investments set out in budget 2025 were historic. They included $150 million for CBC/Radio-Canada, $150 million for Telefilm Canada, $127.5 million for the Canada Media Fund, $48 million for the Canada Music Fund, $26.1 million for the National Film Board and $600 million to support the purchase of Canadian content for TV5MONDEplus. There were historic investments in budget 2025.

We will continue to provide this support to the cultural sector, which is extremely important in Quebec and Canada.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Bloc

Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC

Madam Speaker, the government obviously has many intentions, and we appreciate this openness. However, concrete action is needed.

For example, Quebec's book sector and Livres Québec have been asking for $10 million for years, for reasons such as supporting libraries and promoting the purchase of books from Quebec and even from Canada. That is not a huge amount. One could compare it to the $43 billion the government wants to invest in a pipeline. That would cover quite a few books.

Let us get back to the $10 million. I would like to hear what my colleague has to say. What is the government waiting for to respond to such a simple request, which would be concrete and very beneficial for culture?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

David Myles Liberal Fredericton—Oromocto, NB

Madam Speaker, I also have books at home from publishing houses such as Goose Lane. I actually believe that is the oldest independent publisher in Canada.

We will be there to have these extremely important discussions. This is a very important issue, and we will see what is in the budget. I do not know the details of the budget at this point, but it is certainly an important issue, as is support for creators and authors across Canada.

We will be there to support this sector.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague for his excellent French in answering questions today.

However, my colleague's response was somewhat inconsistent. He said that when his government abolished the levies imposed on the web giants, there was an urgent need to provide the cultural sector with the $600 million in question. However, here we are, nearly 18 months later, and, to the best of my knowledge, not a single player in Canada's cultural sector has received any of those funds.

How can he say it is urgent to provide this money when no one has seen a penny to date? Was this yet another empty promise from the Liberals?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

David Myles Liberal Fredericton—Oromocto, NB

Madam Speaker, as the minister has said on several occasions this week in the House, this money will be coming very soon. That is good news.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

Madam Speaker, they have been saying that the money will be coming very soon for 18 months now.

The government does not want to implement the CRTC's decision, yet $600 million has been sitting on the table for the past 18 months. I am guessing they will earmark another $600 million in the next budget. That will bring the total to $1.2 billion, while we wait for the government to get its act together and finally implement the CRTC's decision.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

David Myles Liberal Fredericton—Oromocto, NB

Madam Speaker, just to be clear, it has not been 18 months. This is an important matter, and, as the minister indicated, the funding will be distributed very soon.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk.

We are debating a motion today that perfectly illustrates how this Liberal government operates. In fact, I should say how it fails to operate, because since this new version of the old Liberal government was elected, we have heard a great deal of promises but seen very few results. We have heard grand promises, significant promises. The first was the Prime Minister's promise that he would be the right person to resolve the tariff dispute with our neighbour to the south, Donald Trump, and that, because he is a prominent banker and has a wealth of experience, he would be able to find a solution that would ensure Canadians pay fewer tariffs.

Eighteen months later, have we seen any improvement? When I speak to businesses in my riding, unfortunately they tell me quite the opposite. Every time that this government takes a step forward, it seems that the U.S. government and Donald Trump use it as an opportunity to raise tariffs. The first misleading claim by this government and this Prime Minister pointed to his long list of credentials and past experience to say that he was the right person for the job. Unfortunately, we have seen that he has been unable to reach an agreement with the Americans, and Canadians are left paying the price.

The second major promise he made was that he would be judged by the prices at the grocery store. Of all the people I have spoken with, not one has told me that groceries have become less expensive over the past 18 months under this new Prime Minister from the same old Liberal government. I think that everyone understands what I mean. Once again, we have a government that talks a lot. Our leader likes to say that this Prime Minister is all talk and no action. Personally, I would say that he is all talk, a bad negotiator and short on results, because nothing is getting done. That is the reality.

I will ask my Bloc Québécois colleagues for their indulgence, as I will return to the motion in a moment, because I want to say that I was asked this week about the fact that I had written to a minister of this Liberal government. It is as though there were something wrong with a member of Parliament writing to a minister because their department is not functioning properly to offer potential solutions. Unfortunately, the minister chose to use that letter to play partisan politics in the House. The Minister of Jobs and Families used a letter that I had sent her on behalf of three businesses in my riding to score political points, claiming that we say one thing and do another, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Since I was unable to table this letter, I would like to read three short paragraphs expressing what I wanted to tell the minister. Here is an excerpt: The current delays at ESDC [Employment and Social Development Canada] are hard to fathom for businesses that rely on the processing times published by the department. In most cases brought to our attention, these processing times are not being met. Worse still, they sometimes end up twice as long as expected.

A little further on, I wrote the following about one company's experience: An LMIA [labour market impact assessment] for three workers was submitted last March 25. More than 90 days after it was filed, the business was still awaiting a reply, and two of the three workers involved were no longer able to work.

Here is a passage concerning another business that illustrates a different issue deserving the minister's attention: The company waited more than 150 days for a response to an LMIA. After more than five months, the file still had not been processed and, according to information sent to my office, had not even been taken in charge by ESDC.

That is what I was telling the minister. I would not have made the letter public. I would not have brought it up here because I thought we could still sort things out with the Liberal ministers. However, it seems that we can no longer trust exchanges between a member who represents a riding and the ministers of this Liberal government. I think that is wrong and that there should seriously be a cabinet shuffle somewhere so that the people who are in those seats realize that they have a responsibility to all Canadians, not just Canadians in their ridings but Canadians in all ridings. That is what democracy is all about. They are government ministers who must represent everyone.

I really wanted to get that on the record. I would also like to seek the unanimous consent of the House to table the letter if my colleagues agree.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to table the letter?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC

Madam Speaker, I suspected that would be the answer.

That is the Liberal government in a nutshell: grand statements, high-profile press conferences and promises. The Prime Minister tells us he will stand up for Canada's interests and honour its commitments. There is a big difference between talking tough and negotiating tough. The Liberals seem to excel at making announcements. The problem is that they are unable to turn those announcements into results.

Let us talk about the gift the Liberals handed to the digital giants in the U.S. What did Canada receive in return? Normally, a skilled negotiator makes concessions on some points in order to secure gains on others. A negotiator who walks away from the table without gaining anything should consider a different line of work. Am I suggesting that the Prime Minister should change jobs? I will let him draw his own conclusions.

Let us review the facts. The Liberal government backed down under U.S. pressure when it came to the major digital platforms helping to fund Canadian culture. Netflix, Disney+ and other digital streaming giants had been expected to contribute 15%. Washington opposed that measure. What did the Liberal government choose to do? It chose to reverse course in June 2025.

What has the government announced to try to smooth things over? It announced that $600 million would be paid to the cultural sector. That money is coming out of the pockets of Canadian taxpayers. Instead of taking that money out of the pockets of the American tech giants, the government is taking it out of the pockets of Canadian citizens. Earlier, the parliamentary secretary told us that this money would be paid out quickly. He was right to issue a correction. It has not been 18 months, it has been 16 months. This money should have been paid to businesses in the cultural sector 16 months ago, not 18 months ago. That is still a 16-month delay, 16 months too late, if we are to believe the Liberals' promise. In other words, what the government did was cut costs for the American tech giants and ask taxpayers to make up the gap, but we got absolutely nothing in return. U.S. tariffs have not gone away and Canadian businesses continue to feel the consequences of the trade war.

We made major concessions. What did we get in return? Nothing. Donald Trump got something. He got his concessions. The tech giants got a break. Canadians got left with the bill. However, we do not know when that bill will come, because no one has been paid. In short, it is a bad deal all around. What a negotiator he is.

Artists, producers, creators and those who work in the cultural sector are the ones being left behind. They likely had high expectations with this announcement. On one hand, they have not received a single cent of the levies that were supposed to be paid out. On the other hand, none of the Liberals' promises have materialized. The government promised a swift resolution, but instead it has created uncertainty. Raising people's hopes only to disappoint them later is not how you run a country. Even the promised compensation has yet to materialize. This is not an isolated incident. I have pages and pages of examples where the Liberals have failed to keep their promises. It has become this government's trademark. The Liberals table a bill promising to protect creators, yet nothing happens. They promise to help businesses by resolving the tariff crisis, but it is not working. They promise to lower the cost of groceries, but there are 2.35 million monthly visits to food banks. The government lectures Canadians about fiscal discipline when they themselves are incapable of it. One need only look at the PBO's figures to see that.

In closing, I would just like to say one thing: Never buy into a Liberal promise.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, I have a very simple question for my colleague. We know that the Leader of the Opposition sent a letter to the Prime Minister asking him to put an end to the entirely legitimate demands that the government was making of the web giants because he was afraid that the Americans would retaliate with more tariffs.

Does my colleague agree with that as a Quebecker, given our cultural specificity? Does he not think that his leader made a bad decision in this case?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC

Madam Speaker, I will let you in on a secret. My leader always makes good decisions. Why? It is because my leader thinks about the families who cannot afford to pay their bills at the end of the month, who are just $200 away from being unable to make ends meet, who are being forced to borrow money. We saw it again this morning in the report from Dalhousie University: More and more people are being forced to use their credit cards to pay for their groceries because they do not have any money.

It is clear that raising taxes and driving up the cost of living is just not in the Conservatives' DNA. There are perhaps different choices that this government could have made to help the cultural industry, but taking more money out of taxpayers' pockets should certainly not have been one of them.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, the member opposite said the leader of the Conservative Party always, and he emphasized the word “always”, makes good decisions. I disagree, and I will give two very clear examples.

Does the member really believe that the leader of the Conservative Party was right when he suggested that we should fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada? Does the member opposite really believe that the leader of the Conservative Party was right when he recommended that Canadians buy cryptocurrency, which ultimately ended up in losing tens of thousands of dollars for people? That was his recommendation back then.

I wonder if the member opposite believes that was a good thing for the leader of the Conservative Party to do, let alone opposing all the affordability measures that the leader of the Conservative Party continues to say no to.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC

Madam Speaker, yes, I agree.

It was actually the former governor of the Bank of Canada, who is no longer there. If my colleague had listened to my leader's advice, he might be rich today and might no longer be here in the House, to the great relief of many opposition members. At the time, cryptocurrency had lost value, but I would point out that that is no longer the case today.

If the measures my colleague is talking about had worked, there would not be millions of people using food banks. I would not hear stories from people who start crying at the grocery store checkout because they are short of money and are forced to take essentials out of their cart. I would not get calls from people asking me personally what they are going to do, because they tried to pay the cashier, but their card was declined and they were ashamed that they could not pay. That is the reality, and I do not understand why the Liberals are ignoring it.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Connie Cody Conservative Cambridge, ON

Madam Speaker, in this current day of an affordability crisis, which the Liberal government voted we are actually not in, I am hearing from members of my community about affordability and accountability with respect to the government. It seems that the government is measuring its success by the amount of money it spends.

What are my colleague's thoughts on that?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC

Madam Speaker, if there is one thing the Liberal government has plenty of, it is money it does not have. The Liberals are putting a lot of measures in place, but not a one of them can be paid with money that exists. It is money the government has to borrow. What does that mean? It means that by 2030, it will cost Canadians $83 billion a year in interest on the debt. That is more than we pay for the health transfer, even though we have major problems across the country, particularly when it comes to mental health.

I therefore invite the Liberals to be more prudent and fiscally responsible with Canadians' money, and I invite them to solve the real problems instead of creating more.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:30 a.m.

Bloc

Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to explain something to me.

He says that there would be affordability issues if web giants, which are making billions of dollars, were required to pay levies. Currently, there are none. If we look at the European experience, we see that in France, levies are 20%, and there is no correlation between the cost of these services to the public and the fact that a 20% levy is charged.

How can he say that this affects affordability?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC

Madam Speaker, companies like Netflix hiked their fees when they saw that the government was going to impose levies. Unfortunately, the levies were scrapped. Prices should have come down for consumers, but none of those companies have lowered their fees.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to take part in today's debate on a motion moved by the Bloc Québécois.

Speaking of the Bloc Québécois, I think it would agree with me that we should give a little nod to what is currently happening in Quebec. After that, I will address the heart of the matter of the digital services tax.

Some will have already noticed this, but the House of Commons is practically serving as a highway to the Quebec National Assembly these days. That may sound a bit poetic, but here are the facts.

Yesterday, the Premier of Quebec, Premier Paul Saint‑Pierre Plamondon, who can now be called “PPSPP”, unveiled the composition of his cabinet. I wish him all the best. Two of his ministers used to sit here in the House of Commons, and they were no ordinary members.

I would like to take a moment to salute and congratulate Alain Therrien, who is now the president of the Quebec Treasury Board. Mr. Therrien served here in the House of Commons as the member for Sanguinet from 2019 to 2025. He was also his party's House leader, and I had the pleasure of working with him, or against him, although it was far more often with him, because he always sought to reach the best compromise for all parliamentarians. I also knew him when he was a member of the National Assembly the first time, and I can say that he is also a great businessman. Above all, he is an honest man who gives his word and keeps it. When I say honest, I know he will do the right thing when it comes to managing public funds at the Treasury Board. I did say he would do “the right thing”, not that he is “right-wing”.

I also want to acknowledge the appointment of Simon‑Pierre Savard‑Tremblay as the Minister Responsible for Relations with the First Nations and the Inuit. As members may recall, Mr. Savard‑Tremblay was the member for Saint‑Hyacinthe in the House of Commons until quite recently. That is no small matter. It is the first time that a first nation member has sat at the cabinet table, dealing with first nations issues in particular. He deserves a round of applause. He is a member of the Wendat Nation. When we say “Wendat” we often think of Wendake. Since he is originally from the Wendat Nation, I used to run into this gentleman at every powwow in Wendake. In fact, the Grand Chief of the Wendat Nation, Pierre Picard, welcomed this appointment and intends to work with him for the good of first nations and all Quebeckers.

There are even more moves from the House of Commons to the National Assembly, as they involve not only elected officials but also people working on parliamentary teams.

Today, a member who once worked in the House of Commons as a senior adviser to a party leader is about to be sworn in. His name is Éric Duhaime, and he once served as senior adviser to the leader of the Canadian Alliance, from 2000 to 2002, in the House of Commons. Understandably, I know Mr. Duhaime well and have had the pleasure of his acquaintance for over 20 years. We worked together at the provincial level, and I am pleased to offer him my heartfelt congratulations. Everyone in politics knows him for the absolutely outstanding and attention-grabbing campaign he led, starting with zero MPs and ending up with 19. Today, these 19 parliamentarians will be sworn in to the National Assembly. History is being written today, 90 years, 10 months and 10 days since 1935, as Conservative members, under the leadership of Éric Duhaime, return to the National Assembly.

As for the official opposition, we can talk about a second generation, since two of the members elected under the Liberal Party banner in the National Assembly and sworn in are the sons of two veteran parliamentarians who have had careers in the House of Commons. Allow me to acknowledge Sacha Cannon, the son of Lawrence Cannon, a well-known member of this House who was also a senior minister and brought honour to Canada around the world when he was foreign affairs minister. I would also like to acknowledge the member for Verdun, Antoine Dionne Charest, son of Jean Charest, who was here as a member of Parliament, deputy speaker of the House, senior minister, deputy prime minister of Canada and party leader, before becoming an MNA and premier of Quebec.

Yes, we see people from the House of Commons at the National Assembly, but the left is also represented, since Québec Solidaire includes a former member of the House of Commons. Here in the House he stood out for inspiring many with his passion and a tone that left no room for interpretation. I am referring to the former member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, Alexandre Boulerice, who is now the MNA for Gouin. I checked his election results. He was elected with 63% of the vote. Let us just say that he does not have to concern himself with recounts. I think his experience here in the House of Commons will be valuable to the Quebec legislature because he, too, has experienced a minority government. Let us not forget that he was part of the parliamentary group that signed a long-term agreement with the minority government. We know the outcome, how things turned out. I think that if, by chance, the leader of Québec Solidaire were considering a long-term agreement with the Parti Québécois government, Mr. Boulerice could keep a close eye on things and tell his leader that it is not really a good idea.

I would like to acknowledge and congratulate the 127 people elected to the National Assembly. I wish them every success in their work on behalf of Quebec. This clearly shows that democracy in Quebec is alive and well. Why is that? It is because there are four distinct parties firmly established in the National Assembly. There are four different colours, four different perspectives. Whether the perspective is sovereignist, federalist, autonomist or socialist, each is represented in the National Assembly.

This leads me to an important point: No one in this House can claim an exclusive right to speak on behalf of Quebec. All members from Quebec speak on behalf of Quebec, and no one has a monopoly on that. The proof is quite simple. Quebeckers have elected four different parties to the National Assembly. Yes, it is a minority government, but what is clear is that the views of Quebeckers will continue to be debated in the National Assembly in the months ahead.

I want to come back to the subject at hand, but I think that was worth mentioning.

The digital services tax is a Liberal Party invention. Let me remind members. Originally, in 2015, the Liberals were against this “Netflix tax” and they did not want to implement it at all. Ultimately, they ended up putting it in place. In November 2020, in an economic update, they announced their intention to create the digital services tax. Between 2021 and 2023, there were a few postponements. On June 20, 2024, they finally passed Bill C‑59, which introduced the digital services tax. On June 28, 2024, the order in council was passed.

What was particularly unfortunate about this approach is that it was retroactive to January 2022. Taxing people, taking money out of people's pockets, is not necessarily the best way to balance a budget. In addition, doing so retroactively was quite unfortunate.

However, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stepped down. The Liberals then adopted a new approach. We all remember that approach: In 2025, they chose a new leader who vowed to stand up for Canada everywhere, especially at the White House, with an elbows up attitude. We all remember the Prime Minister's elbows up rhetoric. How did that elbows up approach end up playing out at the White House? It ended with a thumbs up. When the Prime Minister appeared before the President of the United States, he seemed far less inclined toward elbows up and settled instead for a thumbs up. The photographs speak for themselves, and that is unfortunate.

To demonstrate that he was no longer operating in an elbows up frame of mind but rather in a thumbs up one, he sought to ease tensions in the relationship in the hope of creating more room for a possible agreement with the United States. That is why, on June 30, 2025, he announced the elimination of that tax, saying it would facilitate negotiations. Unfortunately, that approach yielded absolutely nothing. If one campaigns on an elbows up message but shows up with a thumbs up, what does that achieve? It achieves nothing. That is exactly what happened here. The government tried to appease President Trump, but it gained absolutely nothing in return.

That is why what we are discussing today is yet another unfortunate illustration of how the Liberals and this Liberal government say one thing but do the opposite, and never seem to deliver. They are always boasting about all the houses they are going to build, but fewer have been built this year than in previous years. They say they are going to help people more, but 2.35 million people are using food banks. That is the Liberal Party's record after 11 years. That is the Liberal Party's record over the past 18 months, under the leadership of this man, who said he was elbows up but instead, all he can do is give a thumbs up.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:40 a.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I find this somewhat interesting. The member opposite is an experienced parliamentarian. He will recall the original position of the Conservative Party on the digital tax was that of opposition. Conservatives did not support it. Through this debate, maybe we can get a clarification today as to the Conservative Party's position on a digital tax. It is important.

On arts and culture, I have argued in the past and will continue to in the future, as early as this afternoon, that arts and culture are part of our Canadian identity and that all provinces have something to contribute, especially the province of Quebec because of its very unique nature. As a government, it is important that we continue to support that. However, I am more interested in what the Conservative Party's position is on the digital tax today.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:40 a.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Madam Speaker, I am very surprised at the question from the member. I am sure he knows our position pretty well, because it was very clear in 2015: no Netflix tax. All of us here who were elected in 2019, 2021 and 2025 had exactly the same stand on that, which was no taxation.

The Liberals changed their minds. Let me remind them that former prime minister Trudeau said, “We're not going to increase the cost of internet...to impose more taxes...on taxpayers.”

A few years later, however, he said that other countries had taken action and that Canada had no reason to apologize for doing the same.

We are sticking to our guns, but unfortunately, the Liberals are changing their minds like a weather vane.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:40 a.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

Madam Speaker, my colleague pointed to the Prime Minister's lack of resolve in dealing with the U.S. giants, claiming at the time that the issue was one of affordability. However, the $600 million in question ultimately comes out of taxpayers' pockets.

Does my colleague agree with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's solution of imposing levies on billion-dollar U.S. digital platforms?

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:40 a.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Madam Speaker, the problem with the proposal is that Canadians are the ones who will end up footing the bill. That is why we have always taken a completely different approach, one that I acknowledge is open to review. I readily acknowledge that we favour policies that avoid imposing additional taxes or similar charges. That is our approach. I believe that it is the best one, but of course that is a matter for debate.

We were all re‑elected in 2025 on that basis, having received one million votes from Quebeckers. Let us never forget that our Conservative caucus had nine members here in Ottawa in 2025 and eleven afterward. We increased our share of the vote to 21%. More than one million Quebeckers voted for us, so yes, I think so. As I said earlier, we do not speak for all Quebeckers, but many Quebeckers think as we do.

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural SectorBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate all the newly elected members of the Quebec National Assembly, including former members of the House of Commons, especially the Conservative members. It has been decades.

I also thank the member for his comments. Can he give more examples of times when the Liberals failed to keep their promises? If so, what impact have these empty promises had on Quebec?