The hon. member for Cloverdale—Langley City.
House of Commons Hansard #161 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was debt.
House of Commons Hansard #161 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was debt.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Bill C-41—Proposal to Apply Standing Order 69.1—Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules that Bill C-41’s provisions on medical assistance in dying share a common element, so the bill will receive one second-reading vote rather than separate votes under Standing Order 69.1. 500 words.
Alleged Mis-characterization of Members' Remarks —Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules that allegations about remarks made in debate are a point of order, not privilege, and finds the Halifax member’s criticism of an opposition position did not breach House rules. 500 words.
Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2 Report stage of Bill C-31. The bill implements measures from the 2025 budget, including expanded benefits and automatic tax filing for eligible low-income Canadians, business investment incentives, and changes to defence procurement, air passenger complaints, housing finance and pesticide reviews. Government members say it supports affordability and economic resilience; opposition members raise concerns about delayed passage, fiscal management, expanded ministerial powers and insufficient transparency and oversight. 50000 words, 5 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Respecting Families of Murdered and Brutalized Persons Act Report stage of Bill C-235. The bill allows judges to extend parole ineligibility from 25 to 40 years in narrowly defined cases involving the kidnapping, sexual assault and murder of the same victim, with reasons and appeal rights. Supporters say it can reduce repeated trauma for victims’ families; the Bloc raises constitutional concerns based on Supreme Court precedent. The House passes the bill at third reading. 5600 words, 45 minutes.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Speaker, I have spent enough time in business to know that when something is not working, we do not automatically fix it by changing the org chart. We have to identify the problem first.
The government created the Defence Investment Agency promising procurement at speeds not seen in generations, but barely a year later, it is already proposing another restructure. I think it is reasonable to ask about that. What went wrong with the original plan? Which approvals were causing the delays? What actually improved? How will another reorganization solve the problems?
At the end of the day, our soldiers, sailors and aviators do not need another org chart. They need equipment that actually arrives.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
November 3rd, 2026 / 1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK
Mr. Speaker, the member made a comment toward the end of her speech about how the government is not moving with speed. Here we have Bill C-31. It is from the budget last year, yet on Thursday, the Liberals are tabling the budget for the next year.
The Liberals run the calendar themselves. They set the agenda, yet here we are. They passed one budget implementation act, and now we have a second budget implementation act because they messed the first one up so badly that they had to put in a second one.
I wonder if my colleague has any further thoughts on how the government is moving at speeds so slow that this is what we get.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Speaker, what frustrates me most is that we have heard these promises before. We were told that the Defence Investment Agency would eliminate unnecessary bureaucracy, speed up decision-making and finally get equipment into the hands of our armed forces. Now, barely a year later, we are being told that the agency needs to be restructured.
Taxpayers want to know what they actually received for the money already spent. Have procurement timelines improved? Have unnecessary approvals been eliminated? Are troops getting their equipment sooner? Announcements and signing ceremonies make a wonderful press release, but they do not protect Canadians or defend our sovereignty.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, this is very simple to understand. The government, since the last federal election 18 months ago, has evolved military procurement into a Crown corporation. Crown corporations have proven to be exceptionally effective at delivering tangible results.
The Prime Minister and this government increased military expenditures to 2% of Canada's GDP. If the member wants to support our men and women in the forces, I believe the Conservative Party needs to reverse its positioning on Crown corporations and recognize that Crown corporations are able to deliver in a timely, more efficient manner.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Speaker, it seems that what the government wants to do is avoid transparency by putting all of this money, as the PBO mentioned, into Crown corporations. It is very important that we demonstrate for Canadians that taxpayers are getting a fair deal.
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Mr. Speaker, what does my colleague think of the fact that the Liberals have created two classes of seniors: those aged 65 to 74 and those aged 75 and over? The older group's OAS went up, but the younger group's did not.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Speaker, with the interpretation, it did not seem like there was much of a question there, but I appreciate the question.
As always, I am very concerned about the situation facing our seniors, especially with affordability issues. I hear so many in my riding say they are challenged just to put food on their own table and are using food banks. It is a shame.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources, QC
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-31, a second act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025.
The first thing that a budget bill should address are the concerns of Canadians, which centre on the cost of living, economic growth, job creation, housing and the sound management of public finances.
If we look more closely at Bill C‑31, however, we see something else. We see a government proposing to transfer more decision-making powers in a number of areas to its ministers and to the government apparatus. These include powers for the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, powers for the Minister of Transport, additional powers for defence procurement and even new federal powers over mining rights in the north.
My concern is not only about increased powers. I am also concerned about who will oversee their use, ensure accountability and protect Canadians when bad decisions are made. At the end of the day, this is about taxpayers' money, rights and trust in their institutions.
Today, I want to focus on an especially troubling example of this trend. I am talking about clause 51 of Bill C-31, which gives the Canada Revenue Agency new powers to file income tax returns on behalf of certain Canadians without obtaining their express consent. During clause-by-clause consideration at the Standing Committee on Finance, I presented an amendment to protect taxpayers from any errors in the tax returns filed by the CRA.
I will read my amendment, as proposed:
That Bill C‑31, in clause 51, be amended by replacing lines 11 to 19 on page 66 with the following:
(b) for greater certainty, the individual is not responsible for any erroneous statement or omission in the return filed by the Minister.
This was a very simple amendment. It sought to establish a fundamental principle. When the government files an income tax return on behalf of a citizen, that citizen should not be held responsible for any erroneous statements or omissions in the return, since they did not file themselves or expressly approve it.
To understand why that amendment was necessary, we need to look at what is currently provided for in clause 51.
The government wants to allow the Canada Revenue Agency to automatically prepare income tax returns for certain low-income individuals so that they can access the benefits that they are entitled to.
I want to be clear that we all support Canadians being able to receive the benefits they are eligible for. However, the problem is how the government intends to proceed. Under the proposed mechanism, a taxpayer would receive a notice from the CRA and have 90 days to verify the information, report any corrections, or opt out of having a return prepared on their behalf. If they do not respond in time, the CRA would be able to file their return on their behalf without their explicit consent.
What is even more concerning is that under this bill, taxpayers may be held responsible for any errors or omissions that they failed to report. In other words, the government prepares the return, but taxpayers may be held responsible for inaccurate information that they never personally approved. That is precisely what my amendment sought to prevent.
Let us take a very concrete example. A senior receives a notice from the CRA and does not necessarily understand all the tax implications of the notice. Maybe the senior believes that it is just an administrative notice and does not realize that they have to look over the information that the government already has. Another example involves a low-income individual who moves frequently, is going through a rough time or does not yet have reliable Internet access. These people could miss the notice, not understand the steps that need to be taken, or simply not know that some information is incomplete.
After 90 days, the agency would be able to file the person's return. If an error or omission is not corrected, that person could then have to face the resulting tax consequences.
Holding an individual responsible for errors contained in a return they did not file and never expressly approved is unacceptable. Since when does failure to respond to a letter from the government constitute informed consent? Why should the government be able to transfer responsibility for the information it used to prepare a declaration to citizens?
Our amendment aimed simply to protect Canadians from that risk. However, when we presented it in committee, the Liberal members voted against it. They rejected a provision that would have made it clear that taxpayers are not responsible for errors or omissions in the returns filed for them by the minister. What makes this decision even more concerning is that we are not the only ones who have raised these concerns.
Canada's taxpayers' ombudsperson, François Boileau, has himself expressed significant reservations about this mechanism. In his brief to the Standing Committee on Finance, he recommended against adopting the provisions on the proposed deemed filing approach. Indeed, there are risks of error, confusion, and interruption of benefits. The ombudsperson emphasized, in particular, that a system in which taxpayers review and confirm the information before filing their returns would offer better protections. He also proposed additional safeguards should the government decide, despite everything, to move forward. We are talking here about the taxpayers' ombudsperson. His role is precisely to defend citizens' rights in their dealings with the Canada Revenue Agency. When someone tasked with overseeing the fairness of tax services warns us of the risks posed by a new mechanism, we have a duty to listen to him.
There are other issues that also deserve our attention. The government is presenting this measure as one way to facilitate access to the benefit, but the ombudsperson has also pointed out that the anticipated delays could lead to interruptions in payments.
Let us think about that. The government is proposing a system that is supposed to help people with low incomes access their benefits, but which could, in certain circumstances, delay the payment of those benefits. We therefore need to ask ourselves whether the government has really designed the most effective and secure system for Canadians.
A much more reasonable approach does exist. The CRA can prepare the information in advance. It can simplify the forms. It can contact eligible taxpayers. It can help them get the benefits they are entitled to. Before a tax return is filed on their behalf, they should receive a clear confirmation.
We certainly support helping Canadians, but we do not support making decisions on their behalf and shifting the risks onto them.
I would now like to draw the attention of the House to a second problem that we tried to fix in committee. Clause 51 also provides that the Minister of National Revenue may, at his or her discretion, designate any other conditions for determining which taxpayers the CRA may file a tax return for. In other words, Parliament is being asked to give the minister the power to add eligibility requirements without these being clearly and precisely defined in the act.
While the bill was being studied, I asked government officials to provide concrete examples of what those additional conditions might be. I was met with radio silence. They were unable to offer a clear definition. They were unable to provide a single example. Nevertheless, we are being asked to allow for any other conditions.
I still have a lot to say about Bill C‑31, but so far, the Liberal government has shown no willingness to listen, pass amendments or consider the ombudsperson's proposals.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Liberal
Steeve Lavoie Liberal Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, whose speech I enjoyed a great deal.
The recent monetary policy report clearly shows that the Governor of the Bank of Canada, in his analyses, uses the mega deduction provided in the bill as an example.
The mega deduction will give businesses greater access to capital and enable them to make additional investments at a time of uncertainty in our relationship with our neighbours to the south.
This mega deduction is worth highlighting; it is a Canadian monetary policy with a significant impact on our businesses and on investment.
I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question. I also hold him in high regard. He has spent more than 20 years in the banking sector, and I am fortunate to serve alongside him on the Standing Committee on Finance.
What struck me this morning was the testimony of the Governor of the Bank of Canada. He told us that, so far, businesses have mostly absorbed the cost increases associated with higher gas and diesel prices. However, those higher fuel costs are expected to remain higher for years to come and, unfortunately, taxpayers will have to foot the bill for the rise in gas and diesel prices.
That is why, on our side of the aisle, we are calling for the tax on diesel and gas to be scrapped to give taxpayers some breathing room.
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on an important measure that is missing from Bill C-31: health transfers.
Let us recall that the federal government once covered 50% of health care costs. Today, its share has fallen to 22%.
With Bill C-31, we had asked to lock in a 6% health transfer escalator, but nothing has been done. Consequently, next year, that figure could fall to 3%. Our health care system is already struggling. If it were to fall to 3%, it would be catastrophic.
What are my colleague's thoughts on that?
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources, QC
Mr. Speaker, we see it in the interest on the debt. The debt was $700 billion when the Liberals took office; it is now $1.4 trillion. We are paying $58 billion in interest on the debt. That is more than the federal government invests in health care.
If public finances were managed more responsibly, we would be paying less in interest and we could invest that money in Canada's health care system.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK
Mr. Speaker, I appreciated my colleague's speech.
Further to the last question, I will say that the government brought in $130 billion more in tax revenue in 2025 than it did in 2020. When I look at what Canadians got for that $130 billion in extra taxes being taken in, the answer is “nothing”. There is absolutely nothing that Canadians got any benefit from other than paying higher taxes.
I am wondering if my colleague could think of something that the government could be doing differently rather than taxing Canadians to the tune of an extra $130 billion.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal culture of spending without restraint needs to change. That is how the Liberals are managing the country's finances right now.
Government revenues have increased significantly, but spending continues to rise unchecked. That is how they operate. As those of us on this side of the House have been saying, the government keeps getting bigger without ever providing more services to Canadians.
Bill C-31 Motions in AmendmentBudget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2Government Orders
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise on behalf of the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces serving at Garrison Petawawa to speak to Bill C-31, the Liberals' omnibus budget legislation. This bill would establish the Defence Investment Agency as a stand-alone agency.
Now, for Canadians following at home, this is a different bill than Bill C-40, which turns the Defence Investment Agency from a stand-alone agency into a Crown corporation. If Bill C-40 passes, then the entire section of Bill C-31 on the Defence Production Act would be repealed. If this seems confusing to Canadians, it is just because the Liberal government is making things up as it goes along.
The Prime Minister campaigned on a promise to build at a pace not seen since World War II. Since the election, it has been a non-stop parade of announcements to create the appearance of action. Rather than undertaking the hard work to reform how the government procures anything, the Prime Minister took the easy path and announced a new bureaucracy. He convinced his personal friend to lead this new bureaucracy and then made his friend the highest-paid government worker in the country.
Now, when the Prime Minister's friend got started, he discovered how hamstrung he was by the government's broken procurement system, so the Liberals cooked up the legislation we are debating today to create a stand-alone agency. When the Prime Minister's buddy learned how, even as a stand-alone agency, he would still be mired in the Liberals broken procurement system, he threatened to quit. Desperately, the Liberals scrambled for a solution.
Having a close personal friend of the Prime Minister quit after one year would call into question the competency of the Prime Minister. Having built his entire brand around being the competent technocrat, the Liberal Party's greatest fear is that Canadians will come to see the Prime Minister as just another finance bro pushing a self-interest investment scheme. Canadians were hoping for a Winston Churchill. They got the wolf of Wall Street instead, and only prime minister Brookfield can turn defence procurement legislation into an investment portfolio.
This legislation would allow the designated minister to issue sole-sourced contracts. It would allow the minister to purchase stock in companies. It would allow the minister to issue sole-source contracts to companies he bought stock in. When the government becomes the owner, the regulator and the customer, it goes beyond conflicts of interest. It is a conflict of purpose.
Conflicts of purpose are the reason our defence procurement system is so broken under Liberal rule. The defence minister's purpose is to equip the Canadian Armed Forces with the equipment, the weapons and the ammunition they need to train and fight. The procurement minister's purpose is to get the best value for taxpayers. The industry minister's purpose is to divert the contracts to Liberal ridings. During the debate on Bill C-40, the Liberal members were literally bragging about how much money was going to their ridings. What these members always forget is that this is where the tax dollars came from in the first place. This bill and Bill C-40 would combine the worst aspects of Liberal defence procurement into one unaccountable Crown corporation.
We have already seen how the Liberal government operates. Last March the government announced it had issued a sole-source contract for a concrete slab in Canso, Nova Scotia. The so-called spaceport contract is worth $200 million. Worst of all, the government backdated the lease, meaning we paid rent for a full year before even deciding to lease the slab. No rockets were ever retroactively launched. The taxpayers received no value whatsoever. That cannot be explained away.
After the Liberals issued the press release announcing the sweetheart deal, the company's stocks surged. The largest shareholder of the so-called spaceport sold some of his stock and then used government cash to exercise his stock options. He pocketed over $1 million, kept all his shares and taxpayers had to foot the bill.
We cannot get more Liberal insider than a spaceport company with a former Liberal premier on the board, while prime minister Brookfield is taking $200 million out of the defence department for his spaceport friends and cutting the CAF's operational budget by 10%. After Bill C-40 passes, we can expect more of the same with even less accountability.
Unfortunately for the Liberals, the Auditor General's latest report touching on defence procurement drives home the point why nothing in this bill would change defence procurement in Canada. The Auditor General looked at the defence department's management of ammunition. The report found that ammunition for regular use in training was not aligned with current demand while the strategic stockpile was severely depleted. This passage from the report is very revealing:
The Government of Canada, through Public Services and Procurement Canada, had 4 strategic source agreements with Canadian companies to produce ammunition and/or explosives that are available through the Munitions Supply Program. These agreements are to be reviewed and renewed at least every 5 years. We found that 2 of the 4 agreements had expired over 3 years ago. Public Services and Procurement Canada officials told us that a lack of staff contributed to the delay in reviewing and renewing the agreements.
The Liberal government has bloated the bureaucracy faster than any Canadian government. It grew at a pace not seen since World War II. In fact, it added more bureaucrats in the last 11 years than had worked for the government during World War II.
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Speaker, the climate crisis is the defining challenge of our time. It is existential, and our response will shape the legacy we leave for all those who come after us.
This month, I will attend COP31, where countries from around the world will gather to advance solutions. I will go with a simple message: All politicians of all stripes have a duty to protect our precious planet. This is a sacred trust, and Canada has the talent, resources, and responsibility to lead.
By investing in renewable energy, sustainable infrastructure and good green jobs, we can respect our environment and strengthen our economy, but leadership requires courage. Instead, the Liberals are rolling back essential climate measures, expanding fossil fuel pipelines and subsidizing oil and gas giants. New Democrats believe there is a better path forward. If we meet this moment with ambition and resolve, Canada can help build the sustainable world Canadians desire for all generations to come.
Institute of Public Administration of Canada Innovation Award WinnerStatements by Members
Liberal
Helena Jaczek Liberal Markham—Stouffville, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Regional Municipality of York works extremely hard to improve the lives of people experiencing homelessness. It launched a no fixed address pilot program, an integrated, data-informed, people-centred approach that helps vulnerable residents navigate complex support systems with wraparound services. The pilot produced a significant improvement in outcomes and it recently received the Institute of Public Administration of Canada's national award for innovation here in Ottawa. The award recognizes an individual or organization that has produced an exceptional change or new way of doing things that addresses the public interest.
I send my congratulations to the chair of the regional housing and homelessness committee, Newmarket mayor, John Taylor, for his leadership, and to the staff at York region for their remarkable work. I also send a special acknowledgement to Cristina Taglione, director of homelessness community programs, who served as my chief of staff at Queen's Park. I thank the entire team.
Amanpreet S. Gill Conservative Calgary Skyview, AB
Mr. Speaker, this week, Sikh Canadians marked the anniversary of the 1984 Sikh genocide, when thousands of Sikhs were killed in state-sponsored violence in the country they called home.
In November 1984, Darshan Singh Grewal and his pregnant wife, Tejinder Kaur, were living in Indore with their two children. Their home was stormed by an armed mob and set on fire. Darshan Singh was murdered. His children survived because their Hindu neighbour hid them under their bed. This was the story all over India. Thousands of Sikh men were dragged from their homes and burned alive. Women were assaulted and gurdwaras were attacked. Tejinder Kaur lost her husband and everything they had, yet she bravely raised her daughters, and today this family proudly calls Calgary home.
Forty-two years later, the families are still being denied justice. Today, we honour Sardar Darshan Singh Grewal and all the victims who were brutally murdered in the 1984 Sikh genocide.
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Mr. Speaker, recently, while in Syria with the Canadian team, we visited Yarmouk, where, block after block, every single building is a bombed-out shell. There we came across three smiling children coming home from school. When asked, two of them said they wanted to be engineer and one of them, a doctor. At first, I thought that was unrealistic, but then I remembered that, after the Second World War, much of Europe looked like Yarmouk, and it was rapidly rebuilt thanks to the Marshall plan.
Syria needs similar help. The civil war killed over a million people and left over 80,000 with amputations. Bombs are cheap. In a split second, they kill, maim and destroy lives, but it takes an immense amount of resources to rebuild. Furthermore, many things cannot be rebuilt, undone or forgiven. The Nuremberg trials held that war was “the supreme international crime” because “it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”
Although many current global leaders wish it otherwise, these words remain true today, and the day will come when, once again, those who commit war crimes will be held to account.
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
Mr. Speaker, for more than 40 years, he battled wildfires and faced off against raging floodwaters, but every single time he was called to action, he did not flinch. Dean Vincent spent more than 40 years running towards danger to ensure that he helped protect his friends and neighbours of High River.
Last week, Dean announced his well-earned retirement after 40 years at the High River Fire Department. His career reflects the very best of service: community, compassion and commitment. His commitment earned him honours such as the Alberta Emergency Services Medal and the prestigious Governor General's Exemplary Service Medal, which all recognized his incredible career as a firefighter, but it was not that recognition that motivated him. It was his need to help the most vulnerable.
Dean was always someone people could count on in a time of need. On behalf of the House and of all of the residents of High River, I thank Dean for his time and his service. I congratulate him on his retirement and urge him to spend time with his grandchildren. He has earned it.
Daniel Gobeil Liberal Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, I had the great privilege of accompanying Robert Dufour, who was awarded the Sovereign's Medal for Volunteers.
Robert always wanted to help others. This calling led him to become a paramedic. He won over the hearts of all the residents of the Saguenay region, one emergency call at a time. After a 47-year career, he still finds it important to always be there for those who need it most.
Aside from his work in responding to emergencies, he has been involved with the Caserne de jouets Saguenay in Chicoutimi since 1988. His presence in the community never goes unnoticed. His zest for life is contagious. Even standing next to him makes people feel energized.
I congratulate Robert Dufour on receiving this well-deserved medal. He has humbly dedicated his life to helping others. I want to thank him for his great impact on our community.
Dalwinder Gill Conservative Calgary McKnight, AB
Mr. Speaker, on November 8, members of the Hindu, Sikh, Jain and Buddhist communities across Canada will celebrate Diwali and Bandi Chhor Divas.
Diwali is a festival of lights. It celebrates the victory of light over darkness and good over evil. It is a time for new beginnings, for hope and for bringing communities together. This weekend, families across the country will light up diyas, offer prayer and share sweets with their neighbours.
For Sikhs, Bandi Chhor Divas is the day of liberation. In 1619, Shri Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji refused to leave prison unless 52 of his imprisoned colleagues were freed with him. His example reminds us that we must do what is right even when it is hard, and we must always stand with those who are struggling or in need.
I wish everybody in northeast Calgary and across Canada a happy Diwali and Bandi Chhor Divas.
Danielle Martin Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour the beautiful life of Charles Novogrodsky.
Charlie and his wife Myra came from the U.S. as war resisters in the 1960s and fell in love with multicultural Toronto, where they could be rooted in their Jewish identity and engaged with the incredible diversity of languages, cultures, sports and foods embraced by their neighbours.
Charlie's lifelong commitment to human rights, social justice and community service included his leadership at the Toronto Board of Education and the Miles Nadal JCC, the co-founding of Amistad Canada, and his work as a consultant on human rights and equity.
Charlie was a gentle soul with a twinkle in his eye who never stopped learning. He will be deeply missed by Myra, their sons Noah and Tobias, their grandchildren and the community they built together, of which I feel privileged to be a part.
May his memory be a blessing.
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister came to power promising affordability and responsible spending. Twenty months later, Canadians are paying the price for his broken promises.
Amid economic uncertainty and U.S. tariffs, the Liberals are only making things worse. The government is spending money at a record pace and running the largest deficit outside of the COVID pandemic in Canadian history.
What are Canadians getting in return? Higher costs for everything, interest rates hikes and record food bank use.
The Salvation Army reports that nearly one in three Canadians is skipping and reducing meals because they cannot afford groceries, while half are dipping into their savings just to cover basic needs.
Conservatives will scrutinize Thursday's federal budget and fight for measures that will save Canadians money, protect jobs, put Canada first and reward hard work. That means reducing the debt and deficit, extending fuel tax relief and permanently scrapping the clean fuel standard tax.
Canadians need relief, not more Liberal broken promises.