House of Commons Hansard #162 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was illness.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Veterans' Week Members mark Veterans’ Week and Remembrance Day by honouring veterans, serving members and military families, including those affected by the recent deaths and injuries at CFB Wainwright. They reflect on the human costs of war and call for remembrance through ceremonies and storytelling, alongside better care and support for veterans. 2800 words, 25 minutes.
Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act First reading of Bill C-295. The bill requires the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board to avoid investments in entities linked to serious human, labour or environmental rights violations, prohibited weapons, or certain forms of corruption. 300 words.
Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2 Report stage of Bill C-31. The bill implements budget measures, including major-project approvals, Canadian procurement, defence investment, trade diversification, business tax incentives and clean-economy support. Conservatives criticize its defence procurement powers and the government’s spending and debt, while Liberals argue it supports economic growth, workers and households. The Bloc raises concerns about pesticide re-evaluations and public-service immunity. 9200 words, 1 hour.
Wartime Service Recognition Act Second reading of Bill S-246. The bill requires a transparent national framework and objective criteria for recognizing wartime service, applied to past and future conflicts. Members across parties support updating recognition for veterans of conflicts such as the Persian Gulf War and Afghanistan, and the bill passes unanimously for committee study. 6000 words, 45 minutes.
Medical Assistance in Dying Safeguards Act Second reading of Bill C-41. The bill would permanently exclude MAID where mental illness is the sole underlying condition and allow advance requests for people with capacity-limiting illnesses. Liberal and Bloc members emphasize autonomy and respecting prior wishes, while Conservatives question consent and safeguards and call for the measures to be separated for further study. Provinces and territories would decide whether to implement advance requests. 53500 words, 6 hours.
Melissa Lantsman Conservative Thornhill, ON
Mr. Speaker, if any of those programs worked, then food bank use in Toronto would not be up 333% since 2019.
On Monday, I asked if the government would cut taxes on gas. There was no answer. On Tuesday, I asked whether Canadian tax dollars would stay here instead of going to Europe. There was no answer. The government has an affordability problem and it looks like it does not care.
Once more, will the budget offer anything, one word, one sentence, to help save Canadians money?
Leslie Church LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Secretaries of State for Labour
Mr. Speaker, if we look at the report from The Salvation Army, it notes that 83% of respondents say that support services improved their family's well-being, and 53% say that it improved their access to food. That is why our government is funding these services through things like the national food security strategy.
When we look at these reports, they talk about services like the groceries and essentials benefit, the Canada child benefit, the school food program and even the work that we are doing through Build Canada Homes to create affordable housing. These are the ways we bring about affordability for Canadians. We are focused on it and they are not.
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
Mr. Speaker, there has been one consistent theme over the past 10 Liberal budgets: reckless spending. Each budget has delivered record-breaking expenditures. The results have been deficit-fuelled inflation, high interest rates and a crushing cost of living crisis.
Tomorrow, will the government finally reverse course, meet its own financial targets and restrain spending so Canadians can afford to live?
Ryan Turnbull LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)
Mr. Speaker, tomorrow's budget is named, for good reason, “Masters of Our Destiny”. Why? It is because in a moment when our economic security and our sovereignty are being tested at all levels, our government is standing up to protect the country we love to build industries, support families, diversify trade and move quickly to get shovels in the ground and create tens of thousands of new jobs.
If the Conservatives wrote the budget, it would be called “Servants of Surrender”. Why? It is because they waved the white flag before the battle even started.
Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources, QC
Mr. Speaker, here is a riddle. Which former Quebec Liberal finance minister said, “Balancing the budget is not an obsession.... It is a basic requirement so that we can move forward with all of our other public policies”? Which finance minister said that? I cannot name him, because he is currently serving as a Liberal MP and as a member of the Standing Committee on Finance. He is someone I hold in high regard, and I agree with him on the importance of balancing the budget.
Does the Prime Minister agree with his MP?
Mélanie Joly LiberalMinister of Industry and Minister responsible for Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for giving me the opportunity to pay tribute to my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry.
He did a great job when he served as Quebec's finance minister, and he is also doing a great job as parliamentary secretary. We are working together every day to manage the tariff crisis. When I hear my colleagues talking about all the crises that Canada has faced in recent years, I do not understand why they do not think that we are in a crisis right now, given that we are in the midst of a trade war, dealing with job losses and trying to create economic growth, when the U.S. administration wants to—
FinanceOral Questions
Éric Lefebvre Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources, QC
Mr. Speaker, let me try a second riddle. Who said during the election campaign that we must “ensure that government debt-to-GDP declines over the budget horizon”? Who said that? It was the Prime Minister, on page 55 of his election platform. The Prime Minister made a formal commitment to reduce Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio.
What measures will be taken to keep his promise, so he can keep his word, given that the government is announcing a $63‑billion deficit?
Steven MacKinnon LiberalMinister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, when my friend across the way started his question, I already knew that he was not talking about Brian Mulroney or Stephen Harper, who drove the country into debt in a way that had never been done before.
I would like to remind members that we will have the documents and budget numbers here in the House tomorrow. I encourage my colleague to join us here and stay tuned for the economic plan to build a very strong Canada.
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette—Manawan, QC
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-39 is so bad that even the National Women's Liberal Commission is against it. These courageous women are speaking out against the way the current crisis is being exploited to give the Prime Minister excessive powers. They want accelerated authorities to be reported to Parliament and subject to independent review, as well as being time-limited. These women are being sorely let down by their representatives in the government caucus, because no one has had the courage to criticize the overreach in Bill C-39.
Will any minister have the courage to do that today?
Julie Dabrusin LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, I am going to say this again, because I think it is very important to reiterate it for everyone here. We will work to improve the effectiveness of our regulations, but we will not change the environmental standards under those regulations. We will continue to protect the environment, but we will build major projects. These major projects, such as large-scale power generation projects, will actually help us reduce our emissions.
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette—Manawan, QC
Mr. Speaker, they are not doing a very good job.
Speaking of strong women who oppose Bill C-39, on Monday, Magali Picard, of the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, criticized the restrictions on the right to strike. She announced that she would challenge Bill C-39 all the way to the Supreme Court, arguing that it is unconstitutional and would impose the most restrictive labour regime in the G7. Yesterday, AFN National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak likewise called for Bill C-39 to be withdrawn, because it is unsalvageably flawed and violates the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
When will the government finally realize that Bill C-39 belongs in the dumpster?
Steven MacKinnon LiberalMinister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, Ms. Picard and I agree that the Government of Canada must invest more to prevent labour disputes, lockouts and strikes. That is why Bill C-39 proposes introducing special measures, special mediation, new techniques and new approaches. The goal is to ensure that not just 95%, but a much higher proportion of labour disputes are definitively resolved through collective agreements, rather than through strike action.
Shuv Majumdar Conservative Calgary Heritage, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister called this the greatest crisis since the Second World War. Then he said Trump is a transformational president. He said integration is subordination and then wanted more integration to “make America great again.”
He decried a world of fortresses and then “fortress North America”. He said that we are “at war” and the U.S. wants to break us to own us.
Now he has a chat with the President about T-shirts and dress shirts. There is a new deal, the best deal, then no deal beats a bad deal, and now a bad deal beats no deal at all.
Every position changes except for one: whatever helps Liberals in December's by-elections.
What is the actual plan, or is it just putting his party ahead of the country?
Dominic LeBlanc LiberalPresident of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade
Mr. Speaker, speaking of some positions that never change, there are the attempts of the Conservative Party to connect a series of dots that do not exist.
I am surprised the Conservatives continually talk about by-elections. I am not sure it is going to be something they will like to talk about in a few weeks. Some of them, in fact, were caused by members of their own party evacuating the caucus.
I understand our friends on the other side want to connect a series of dots. They know very well our government is hard at work to defend workers and businesses in Canada, and we will continue to do that.
Shuv Majumdar Conservative Calgary Heritage, AB
Mr. Speaker, “defend workers”? Last month, economist Trevor Tombe told the foreign affairs committee there is no evidence the Liberal countertariffs changed American behaviour, none. What they did was raise prices across the board and slash the income of Canadians earning under $30,000. Liberals are taxing our most vulnerable to punish Washington, and Washington could not be bothered.
Beyond the domestic Liberal politics designed to control our national debate, what is the plan beyond “elbows up” to actually level up?
Dominic LeBlanc LiberalPresident of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade
Mr. Speaker, again, we see members of the Conservative Party attempt to attribute a series of motivations in circumstances that do not exist. They know very well. Our government was very clear. When the Americans increased unjustified and illegal tariffs on Canadian businesses and workers, Canadians expected our government to take a strong position, something the opposition would never have done, because they continually find excuses as to why Canada should not have stood up to the Americans and done the right thing to defend workers.
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
Mr. Speaker, while businesses are shutting down, workers are losing their jobs and families are struggling to make ends meet, the Prime Minister would rather play his Trump card. He said last week that he could wait two and a half years to secure a trade agreement. Conveniently, after calling by-elections, he suddenly picked up the phone and called the U.S. President. Canadians do not want theatrics. They want results.
When will the Prime Minister finally deliver the major trade deal he promised?
Dominic LeBlanc LiberalPresident of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure whether my colleagues would agree, but hearing the member talk about theatrics seems a bit ironic, considering his behaviour in this place. Once again, the Conservatives are trying to connect a series of events that they know full well are completely unrelated.
Yes, we called by-elections, because those ridings deserve to be represented in the House of Commons by strong members of Parliament. Yes, we will stand up for Canadian workers and businesses. We will stand up to the Americans. These are things the Conservatives would never do.
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, after 11 years of Liberals, there are two worlds: one where Canadians follow the rules and count every dollar but cannot get ahead, and another where political and business insiders get a seat at the big table and make up their own rules. Companies pay staff in the Liberal Major Projects Office, which makes decisions worth billions of private and public dollars. I questioned it six months ago and last night, but the minister will not even say which sectors the staff are from. So much for accountability and transparency for taxpayers.
How many MPO staff are paid by companies whose projects the office reviews, and will the minister name the companies?
Dominic LeBlanc LiberalPresident of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade
Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to have this conversation with our colleague on the other side last evening at the building Canada committee. She just asserted that we did not talk about which sectors these interchange employees come from. Last night I said, and I am happy to repeat it again, the transportation sector, financial services sectors and agriculture sectors.
Many of these interchange positions, something that has existed in government for well over 50 years, include other orders of government, and they also allow public servants to work in the private sector and for non-profit organizations as well.
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, last night the minister actually called disclosure a “gotcha moment“ when accountability is literally his job.
Companies help pay staff inside the Major Projects Office, but conflicts are reviewed internally without independent ethics oversight. The Liberals want Canadians to trust the safeguards but hide how and to whom those safeguards apply. The minister should release the rules, name the companies and say how many staff have been recused.
If the safeguards are so strong, why is the secrecy even stronger, and what does the minister have to hide?
Tim Hodgson LiberalMinister of Energy and Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, while the Conservatives want to think about conspiracy, what we do at the MPO is create jobs, like the 5,000 new jobs at Churchill Falls, the 8,000 new jobs at Contrecoeur, the 1,000 new jobs at Nouveau Monde Graphite, the 5,000 new jobs at LNG Canada and the 7,000 new jobs at Ksi Lisims.
Instead of talking down the MPO, why do they not help us build jobs?
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Winnipeg West, MB
Mr. Speaker, as part of the alliance for the future, the new partnership of nations that will leverage the strategic capabilities of Canada and the EU, our government is making a historic investment of up to $2.5 billion in financing for Alberta-based De Havilland to dramatically increase water bombing production capacity.
Can the Minister of Emergency Management and Community Resilience tell the House how this financing will help European partners and Canada fight wildfires and support thousands of jobs across Canada?
Eleanor Olszewski LiberalMinister of Emergency Management and Community Resilience and Minister responsible for Prairies Economic Development Canada
Mr. Speaker, this is an investment in Canadian workers, Canadian aerospace ingenuity and community safety. It will help Alberta-based De Havilland double production of its iconic 515 water bombers, supporting thousands of great jobs in Alberta. This investment will get more of these life-saving aircraft where they are needed sooner.
The Leader of the Opposition called the EU-Canada summit “political theatre”. I doubt the workers benefiting in Alberta, the province he represents, would agree.
