Debates of Feb. 23rd, 2026

Build Canada Homes Act

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to get a chance to speak about Build Canada Homes. To begin with, I would like to say hello to voters in my riding of Acadie—Bathurst, who have probably tuned in to watch me this evening.

I think that the Build Canada Homes bill we are discussing today is an outstanding initiative. However, before I get to what we want to do with Build Canada Homes, I would like to talk about various programs that have been extremely beneficial to my riding of Acadie—Bathurst, in collaboration with the Department of Housing and Infrastructure. My colleague spoke earlier about mayors and municipalities.

Let us begin with the program known as the housing accelerator fund. It provides dedicated funds directly to municipalities. My New Brunswick riding was fortunate enough to have six such agreements. The funds go directly to the municipalities. Developers then contact them to inquire about construction projects, whether for affordable housing or for other types of housing. These municipalities far surpassed their objectives, and it shows on the ground, because there is construction going on everywhere. People can watch the housing be built from the ground up. Some of it is ready. Some people have moved in. The program has been extremely beneficial to municipalities in my region. As my colleague said earlier, the Leader of the Opposition called the mayors of some municipalities incompetent. I hope that people will remember that the mayors in my region were not incompetent. They created a tremendous amount of housing, including affordable housing, housing for young people and housing for young families. The program has been a huge boon to my region.

The other program I want to talk about is the Canada housing infrastructure fund. This fund still exists, and the federal government has signed agreements through it with the provinces, including my province, New Brunswick. Once again, we had great programs to ensure that municipalities could move forward with water and sewer projects, for example, to connect new housing developments to that infrastructure.

I recently had the opportunity to make an announcement with my colleague, the member for the provincial riding of Bathurst West-Beresford and New Brunswick's finance minister. To develop the former site of a mill that had been closed since the 2000s, we managed to secure funding through the Canada housing infrastructure fund, which enabled us to build more than 300 housing units there. Just recently, an announcement was made about housing for homeless people that has begun to be built on that land. This shows that these programs are working. There are also several other programs for which we want to partner with New Brunswick. In the coming weeks or months, we hope to increase our collaboration with New Brunswick to be able to build more housing.

Regarding Build Canada Homes, as members are aware, we want to make sure that we build affordable housing. I know opposition members often say that we create more bureaucracy. I disagree. We are going to make things easier for developers, whether they are private developers, community associations or housing co-ops. There are many of them in our regions, especially in rural areas. Every stakeholder I have talked to about what Build Canada Homes will look like is very excited. They hope that this will spark interest among developers.

In addition, we often forget about modular home developers and companies. There are two such companies in my riding: Supreme Homes and Trusko Inc. They are currently building modular housing and, once again, this type of housing is affordable. We see these homes going up day after day. People can feel it in the air, it is tangible. People are waiting for these units. Some of them have already been able to get into a home.

However, as we know, too many Canadians are still having a hard time finding affordable housing. Housing costs are rising, and unfortunately, supply is not keeping up with demand. By consolidating functions that were previously scattered across several departments, agencies and programs, we will strengthen the government's ability to deliver meaningful results. As my colleagues said earlier, traditional approaches need to be reviewed. We must accelerate housing construction. For example, under other programs, municipalities have amended their zoning bylaws to speed up housing construction. That will continue.

Build Canada Homes will be a developer, a funder, a facilitator and a catalyst for innovation in the housing sector. Canadians need more housing, and Bill C-20, the Build Canada Homes act, will make it possible to build faster and more efficiently at scale.

The global economy has recently undergone a shift that has profoundly transformed the traditional world order. Canada can no longer count on its most important trading relationship. Because of that, we are building our capacity here at home by building stronger relationships across all levels of government, including municipal, territorial and provincial governments, as well as with our indigenous partners.

We are making strategic investments to build a stronger, more sustainable and more resilient economy. We are working to cut red tape, eliminate internal trade barriers and sign new agreements that will stimulate local economies.

In these uncertain times, the Government of Canada is taking decisive action now to transform our nation and make it more resilient so that it can shift from reliance to resilience. The goal is to make Canada one of the fastest-growing and most competitive economies in the world and to usher in a new era of economic security and prosperity for Canadians.

The Government of Canada will achieve its goals by building on the strength of our industries and by implementing measures such as Build Canada Homes and the buy Canadian policy, which will enable it to invest in the future and stimulate economic growth.

The buy Canadian policy will have an impact on our softwood lumber industry, for example. There are several companies in my region, including two major plants, that process softwood lumber. They are delighted with the amounts being invested in Build Canada Homes. It will help them diversify their markets a bit if their wood is used to build the homes we need in Canada. During my meetings with these companies, it was very clear that they were about to go through a period of uncertainty because of what is happening with the markets, mainly in the United States. If we help them through Build Canada Homes, they will be able to sell their wood, and we will be able to build homes faster in Canada.

As a Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes will be funded by an initial $13-billion envelope announced in budget 2025. Build Canada Homes was created to centralize federal support for affordable housing in coordination with other departments and agencies. It will act quickly and leverage federal land, support innovative construction approaches and form partnerships across all sectors to build more housing.

Build Canada Homes is a key part of Canada's new industrial strategy. It will stimulate the residential construction sector and make it more productive. Build Canada Homes will revitalize the housing industry by enabling the construction of thousands of new homes. As construction ramps up, we will ensure the growth, training and support of Canada's skilled workforce, while creating well-paying jobs. In addition to building new homes, we will also support the development of essential housing infrastructure such as water and sewer systems.

With existing programs and with the creation of Build Canada Homes, I think Canadians will see that we believe in them. Canadians will see that we understand their concerns and that we understand that they need affordable housing. That is exactly why we are moving forward with a bill like this one while maintaining our existing programs. We are moving forward to build as many homes as possible for Canadians.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I recently met with the Niagara Home Builders' Association, and its members indicated to us that bureaucracy will not build homes.

One builder has laid off 60% of their staff. They used to build 300 homes but are now building only 30. Their one solution to the housing crisis, and they told us this, was to adopt the Conservative plan of removing the GST on all new homes, not just for first-time homebuyers.

Can the member explain to us why the Liberal government will not simply adopt that idea?

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, if we adopt the Conservatives' plan, we would probably end up with six housing units, which is what was built when the Leader of the Opposition was the minister responsible for housing.

The Conservatives like to talk about bureaucracy. We like to talk about building homes, and building homes by the thousands. The current programs we put in place are already getting it done, but with Build Canada Homes, we will do even more.

The Conservatives like to talk about bureaucracy but fail to see what is good about this strategy. Their strategy is always to delay the process and delay the construction of these homes. We see things differently.

We want to move forward to ensure that there are more affordable housing units for Canadians, and that is what we are going to do.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think things would move faster if the government acted like a minority government instead of always trying to impose its solutions.

I would like to know something. All of this is going to result in a very centralized entity that impedes on Quebec's area of jurisdiction. However, not everyone shares the same vision.

Quebec and the municipalities are the ones who are most up to speed on housing needs. The federal government's idea of affordability differs wildly from Quebec's. I went to a building inauguration a few years ago. I was very pleased because we need more housing. However, it was deemed affordable housing when it was not affordable at all. Members can imagine the reactions I got when I posted it on social media.

Why not create a program that would allow Quebec to, first of all, have an envelope allocated—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I will give the member the opportunity to respond.

The hon. member for Acadie—Bathurst.

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague knows that we have always been able to collaborate with Quebec on plenty of files, including housing.

Ultimately, what we want to do is build as much affordable housing as possible for as many Canadians as possible. I think that residents of the province of Quebec will continue to benefit from these programs. It will always be a pleasure for us to work with the Government of Quebec. I even think that some discussions have led to agreements with the Government of Quebec. We look forward to continuing in this vein.

Our goal is to build as much housing as possible for all Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague knows, this was a very important issue for our new Prime Minister and the government as a whole. In fact, it was incorporated into the throne speech that was delivered back in May of last year. It is good to see the legislation before us.

Could the member provide his thoughts in regard to how important this issue is for the government of the day, in particular the Prime Minister and the Liberal caucus?

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I think my colleague is well aware that it is very important to our government to ensure that we build as much affordable housing as possible for as many Canadians as possible.

As we all know, young families and young people want access to housing. With programs like Build Canada Homes and other existing programs, we will provide families and young Canadians with the housing they need.

I think the Prime Minister has been clear. We want to see massive housing construction. That is what Build Canada Homes is all about.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the good people of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry. When I get the chance to talk about housing, as a former mayor for the township of North Dundas and warden in SDG, it is an issue that is near and dear to my heart, and not only because of my previous municipal experience. As we go out and talk to residents in our ridings, and I know it is the same for each and every member in this House, housing is probably one of the top national concerns in every single part of this country.

I am going to be splitting my time with the hon. member for Richmond Hill South, and I know he will have some comments as well about the latest piece of Liberal legislation before us.

What is important, as we begin this conversation on the latest Liberal attempts to address affordable housing, is that we look at where we are after 10 years. After 10 years of the Liberals in office, not just in Cornwall and SDG with the data from the Cornwall and District Real Estate Board, but right across this country, housing prices and rent have doubled. At a time when we need to build more homes and get more shovels in the ground, we are actually seeing red tape and taxes as a key part of the burden. We are actually seeing housing starts projected to fall in the coming years, which is going to make affordability and demand that much more challenging.

When we look at this, according to the government's own data, we need to build about 450,000 to 480,000 homes per year, just to meet demand and keep up with affordability, every year until 2035. Right now we build about half of that.

The Liberals have put this piece of legislation before us. Their solution is that one bureaucracy for housing was not enough, a second bureaucracy did not solve the problem, and neither did a third, so, as I guess they say in Liberal land, the fourth time will be the charm. We have the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the Canada Lands Company and the department of infrastructure and housing, and now we would have Build Canada Homes, which would apparently be the bureaucratic solution to the problems we face in this country.

When I went door-knocking in the last election, and when I go out and about and talk in our community, whether it is in the united counties, Cornwall or Akwesasne, and people talk about housing, not a single person suggests to me that the thing that would make the difference, make housing more affordable and get more shovels in the ground would be one more new housing agency or bureaucracy in this country. I did not hear that anywhere, but we did hear the stories of young people living in their parents' basements, wanting to have the dream of home ownership like their parents and grandparents did.

It was the common consensus for young people in this country for decades that if they worked hard and saved up, home ownership would be achievable. They cannot even save now, because rent is so high and the cost of living is so high, but that dream of home ownership has eroded bit by bit, and here we are now with the government claiming that it is going to come in with billions of new dollars to try to address the problem.

Here is the thing with this piece of legislation that we have before us with Build Canada Homes: The Liberals claim that it is going to help bridge the gap and get more shovels in the ground and homes built. However, their own data from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation show that after this plan is taken into calculation, we are not going to see that. The government said it is going to build 5,200 homes per year. That was from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, but the CMHC numbers say that housing starts are actually going to go down.

The Liberals spend billions and billions on bureaucracy, programs, photo-ops, announcements and claims that it is going to get better, but we are actually going to see a decrease in the number of homes being built. I would say it is surprising, but it is not surprising, because the Liberals just do not learn after 10 years. They are relying on the same failed approaches to get us out of this crisis in housing that we face.

There is a way that we can do better on this. I am often asked what we do as a Conservative opposition. We are a loyal opposition. We look at the legislation, we scrutinize it, we support it where we can, we amend it where we can, and we vote either for or against it. That is what a loyal opposition does. We highlight the shortcomings of the government and propose our own solutions. I am often asked what Conservatives would do that could change the game when it comes to housing and getting more homes built in this country.

There are four things I want to highlight. The first is that we could cut the GST on all new homes under $1.3 million. That is something that the industry says would spark an extra 35,000 to 40,000 new homes in this country every year. The most expensive part of buying a new home is not the labour and not the materials; it is actually government taxes and fees. Therefore, if we could take the GST off and work with provinces to take the HST off, in the province of Ontario that is 13% on a million-dollar home or on a home that is half a million dollars. It is hard to build one for half a million dollars today, but people could be looking at savings anywhere from $65,000 to $130,000 if we were able to take all the HST off.

There is also the ripple effect. If, on a $1.3-million home, GST alone comes off, that is a $65,000 savings up front, but it also would save on the mortgage. There would be less to be mortgaged, less to be made in payments and less to be paid in interest. That would make home ownership instantly more affordable for Canadians, whether they are a first-time homebuyer or someone who is looking to build their dream home for which they have saved and worked so hard their entire life.

The second thing we could do is tie federal infrastructure dollars to homebuilding. We would say to municipalities that they need to permit 15% more houses year over year, each and every year, so we can get the tide going in the right direction. We could tie federal funding, the billions of dollars from the federal government to support infrastructure, to actual results. We could say to municipalities that it would not be when they have a plan or an aspiration, or have done a study and intend to do something, but rather when building permits are actually permitted that the municipalities get paid. That is a huge incentive for municipalities.

Further, if municipalities exceed that goal, Conservatives have said that we would bonus them. We could tie it to homebuilding, tie it to results and get municipalities on the right track, leading by example and permitting more homes that we need, to actually go up, in the right direction.

The third thing is what the Conservatives have said and what the Liberals promised in the last election, but they have broken their promise. They said they would be cutting development charges by 50%. We said the same thing. The reality is that they have not done that. They have had a budget and a Speech from the Throne, and now they have this legislation, Bill C-20, before us which would mandate municipalities to do so. The Liberals have refused to take that step.

Again, not only is it the GST and the HST on a new home build; there are development charges as well. These add up to the biggest cost: taxes and fees. Conservatives are saying to the Liberals, “Just keep the promise made during the election campaign. Agree with us, and let us cut development charges by 50%.” They have refused multiple times, at every opportunity in the last year, to keep their word and their promise with respect to housing. If this is a signature, cornerstone piece of legislation that they claim is part of their backbone to housing, that promise should have been in there, but it is not.

The fourth thing we could do is end the capital gains tax on reinvestment in new housing in Canada, which would unlock billions of dollars in investment in our country's homebuilding sector. Here is an example of what we could do. If somebody builds a 10-unit apartment building and sells that building, as opposed to paying capital gains taxes on it, if they reinvest that money in another apartment building, reinvestment could happen, and the federal government could defer that tax. We would have more units, and more building would take place. We would get more results. It would be a rocket ship of an opportunity to get our housing and our homebuilding sector fired up and going in the right direction.

We have before us another piece of Liberal legislation for a fourth bureaucracy: more bureaucracy, more plans, more studies, more photo ops and more good-intention announcements. It would lead to the same result we have had for the last year.

The Conservatives will stand with the action plan I presented, and that would be the true way we could make homes more affordable in this country. After 10 years, the Liberals are recycling the same old ideas. It is time for a new approach under the Conservative plan.

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

Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely no surprise in the member's comments. That is what we have been hearing all day from the Conservative Party. The Conservatives do not support Bill C-20. They do not support the federal government's having a stronger, healthier role in working with provinces, territories, indigenous communities and the many different stakeholders. They want to just get out of the way, as they always like to say.

We know you are voting against the legislation. It was in the throne speech. It was a commitment by the Prime Minister and every Liberal member of Parliament. Will you at the very least not filibuster the legislation so we can actually see it proceed through the process?

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I want to remind the parliamentary secretary to speak to the member through the Speaker.

The hon. member for Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to apologize for that member. He does not get up and speak too much in the House too often. He needs to be reminded of the rules a little bit.

The comment was interesting that the legislation would be giving the federal government and the Liberals a stronger, healthier relationship with provinces and municipalities. I am pretty sure they said the same thing regarding the national housing strategy that they had 10 years ago, which saw housing prices double. We had the housing accelerator fund that was going to be stronger and healthier. What happened? We are not seeing shovels get in the ground. We are seeing fewer shovels in the ground. We are seeing housing prices that have doubled. We are seeing rent that has doubled. That is their record.

If we just give them the fourth chance in 10 years to get it right by using the same recycled approach, they say they will get a different result. That is the definition of insanity. We are not going with it.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Automotive Industry

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise to follow up on the question I raised a couple of weeks ago in question period about the serious strain that our auto sector is under and the serious threat we are under.

Donald Trump has made it very clear that he wants to shutter the auto sector in this country. He wants to bring all the jobs that are here in Canada, the tens of thousands of direct and indirect jobs, down to the United States. We have seen, sadly, over the course of the last year, 5,000 job losses. It has been devastating for Brampton, for Oshawa and for Ingersoll. The list goes on. Parts manufacturers have laid employees off and have taken their jobs and moved them to the United States.

Here is an alarming number as to where the auto sector is today: In 2016, Canada built 2.3 million cars. Last year, that number dropped to 1.2 million. The number of cars being built in the country has been halved in the last decade. That is an alarming number and very dangerous when it comes to the threats that we face. What frustrates me very much is the latest Liberal plan, which they call their national auto strategy, that includes the EV rebates for vehicles under $50,000.

Donald Trump, in the midst of this unjustified, illegal and wrong tariff war that we are under right now, is tariffing every single Canadian vehicle made here and brought into the United States. That is wrong. It is unacceptable, and we are fighting back against that.

What is the Liberal strategy on this now? If we have an American-made EV that qualifies under that $50,000 threshold, that American EV, which is made in the United States, can get a subsidy to be built there and brought into Canada. That is absolutely ridiculous.

We are in the midst of a trade war. I do not accept for a second the industry minister's Liberal talking point that we are in an integrated North American auto sector. We are not now, when we have a President in the United States who is unjustifiably tariffing every single Canadian vehicle going into the United States. It requires forceful push-back against that, and that should not include giving subsidies to American-made EVs being moved into Canada.

Here is the reality. There is only one car made in Canada today that will qualify, the Dodge Charger. The last time the Liberals had the EV rebate, 99% of the EV rebates given were for foreign-made cars, including 31% from the United States.

My question to the Liberal government continues to be this: Why are we giving a penny of Canadian taxpayer money for any vehicle, any vehicle at all, being made in the United States and being brought into Canada when the President of the United States is tariffing every vehicle coming from Canada into the U.S.?

It makes no sense. It is the opposite of elbows up, and it needs to be scrapped. Will they do it?

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport and Internal Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to speak about the government's new electric vehicle affordability program.

Canada has already made significant progress toward increased electric vehicle adoption. For example, the incentives for zero-emission vehicles, or iZEV, program, which ended last January, provided incentives for over 560,000 vehicles between 2019 and 2025. Combined with other federal, provincial and territorial measures, the iZEV program helped Canada reach a market share of 5.4% for new light-duty electric vehicles in 2024, and that is up from 3.1% in 2019.

We know that there is more work to be done and that EV affordability remains one of the top barriers to greater adoption. That is why Canada's auto strategy includes a new $2.3-billion electric vehicle affordability program. This program is expected to incentivize over 840,000 new electric vehicles over the next five years.

The program has already garnered significant attention and interest from Canadians as well as automakers. As of today, there are almost 20 EV models listed on Transport Canada's website that consumers can choose from, and we expect this list to grow as manufacturers and dealerships adjust their pricing in the coming years. This program will drive down EV prices across the country and bring affordability to a larger segment of the Canadian population, and Canadians can stand to benefit from these incentives right away, as they are applied directly at the dealership.

To strengthen our domestic industry, Canadian-made EVs will be exempt from the price cap, supporting good jobs, Canadian workers and, indeed, Canadian innovation. The electric vehicle affordability program is an element of Canada's auto strategy, which, when coupled with plans to develop a national charging infrastructure strategy, will strengthen domestic demand by making EVs more affordable and reliable for Canadians.

The strategy will also help our auto industry navigate both the challenges and opportunities stemming from the rupture and reshaping of global trade relationships, and it will position Canada well to attract new investment and diversify export markets by leveraging free trade agreements.

We know Canada's EV manufacturing is in the early stages of development, and that is why this automotive strategy is focused not just on supporting EV manufacturing but also on building new strategic partnerships with global EV leaders in manufacturing, such as China. This will further diversify the trade and be a catalyst to new investment in the automotive sector. This, coupled with the announcement that we will be entering into a new joint venture with Chinese investment in Canada, will allow for Chinese EV imports into the Canadian market.

I raise this to highlight how Canada is adjusting to the new realities of global trade relationships to ensure that Canada's automotive sector remains robust and competitive in years to come. In practical terms, this means that for the foreseeable future, Canada will see fewer EV imports from the United States in favour of EVs imported from other, more reliable trading partners.

I will conclude with this. Canada is demonstrating to the world that it will be charting a new course on electric vehicles. We will do so by continuing to invest in the auto sector to ensure that we are building the cars of tomorrow, and we will do so in a way that reflects the new market realities while sending strong signals of where we want to go in the future.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians can see for themselves how clear the contrast is between the Liberal plan and the Conservative plan. The Liberals want to provide subsidies and give the opportunity for American-made EVs to be subsidized, built in the United States and shipped into Canada, but all while Donald Trump is tariffing every single Canadian vehicle going from Canada to the United States.

Conservatives are proposing to scrap that part of the plan and take the GST off all Canadian-made vehicles so Canadians have a big incentive to buy Canadian and support our Canadian auto sector. We would take the GST off Canadian-made vehicles and support Canadian auto workers, while the Liberals have a $2.3-billion plan that is going to provide hundreds of millions of dollars to American-made vehicles coming into our country. It is completely unacceptable. It is the opposite of elbows up and needs to be scrapped immediately. Will they do it?

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Sydney—Glace Bay, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's auto industry is undergoing a historic shift, and our government is ensuring that Canadians are ready to lead in a future that is electric. Indeed, our elbows are up and will remain up. The bottom line is that we are going to where the puck is. We are making investments in Canadians, Canadian workers, Canadian businesses and the Canadian automotive sector. We will continue to do so. The world has changed and we must with it.

The Economy

[William Stevenson, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, tax policies do not exist in a vacuum. They only work if the system actually works for the people who rely on it. As a chartered professional accountant, I have spent 26 years in public service. I have filed thousands of tax returns. For decades, friends and clients relied on me to navigate our complex tax system.

Canada's tax system is based on voluntary self-reporting, and that translates into ordinary Canadians being penalized if they do not get it exactly right. The role of CRA should be to help people comply on time and accurately. That means clear answers, knowledgeable staff and accessible service. However, most Canadians have a bad experience with CRA. They struggle to get through on the phone, and they receive inconsistent answers. Some agents are excellent professionals. Others simply read from a script, offer confusion instead of clarity or are simply wrong. That is not good service. Good service requires proper training, accountability and staffing models that allow agents to access the tools they need to help taxpayers.

The CRA touches millions of Canadians every year. It does not have to be this painful. If the Liberal government is serious about respect for taxpayers, it should focus less on extracting every last dollar and more on helping Canadians comply with confidence, dignity and accuracy.

For months, Canadians have been told by the government that there is no tax on food. In December, when I asked the Prime Minister about hidden taxes on food, one of his parliamentary secretaries claimed that the taxes have zero impact on food prices. However, Canadians cannot buy groceries with Liberal talking points. They pay with their hard-earned dollars. When government policies drive up the cost of fuel, energy, packaging and production, that is a tax on food, even if we do not see it listed on our grocery bill.

The clean fuel standard alone adds real costs to gasoline and diesel. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has confirmed this increases fuel prices now and they will keep rising. That affects farmers running equipment, truckers hauling food, processors packaging it and stores keeping the lights on. These costs do not disappear. They are passed on to families at the grocery store. The same is true for the industrial carbon tax. Taxing industries that grow, process, transport and refrigerate food means higher prices for everything we eat. Experts have warned that these policies are making Canadian food producers less competitive, especially compared to the United States, and the gap is growing.

Then there is inflation driven by the reckless spending and the Prime Minister's recent $78-billion deficit. Inflation is the most painful hidden tax of all because it erodes the value of every paycheque. On top of that, the government piled on new costs through its food packaging rules, hitting restaurants and takeout providers already facing serious financial strain. Thousands of restaurants have closed and more are expected to follow.

These policies all add costs to food. Conservatives call it what it is, a tax. If the Prime Minister is serious about affordability, would he eliminate the fuel standard and bring his deficit under control to stop taxing the food supply chain?

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport and Internal Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the global landscape, as we know, is rapidly changing, leaving economies, businesses and workers under a cloud of uncertainty. In response, Canada's government has focused on what we can control, which is building a stronger economy to make life more affordable for all Canadians. To that end, we are securing new trade and investment partnerships abroad and building our strength here at home to create good career opportunities with higher wages for Canadians. However, we understand that many Canadians are struggling to make ends meet and need immediate support.

When we go to the grocery store, we see higher prices, and it is harder for Canadians to put food on the table for their families. With the new Canada groceries and essentials benefit, normally known as the goods and services tax, or the GST, credit, we are making groceries and other essentials more affordable. I am proud to say that the new Canada groceries and essentials benefit will provide additional support for more than 12 million Canadians, including many in my riding of Sydney—Glace Bay.

We are increasing the amount of the benefit by 25% in five years, beginning in July of 2026. On top of that, we are providing a one-time payment this spring, equivalent to a 50% increase in the 2025-26 value of the HST credit. Combined, this means that a family of four will receive over $1,800 this year and about $1,400 a year for the next four years. A single person will receive up to $950 this year and about $700 a year for the next four years.

The government is also setting aside $500 million for the strategic response fund to help businesses address the cost of supply chain disruptions without passing on the cost to Canadians at the checkout line. We will also, for the same reason, dedicate $150 million under the existing regional tariff response initiative to support investments in food security by small and medium-sized enterprises and the organizations that support them. As we know, thanks to budget 2025, we are doing much more to make life more affordable for Canadians.

Budget 2025 builds on the many actions we have already taken to support Canadian businesses at a time of significant uncertainty and affordability challenges. When we look at things such as rate reductions, which is currently before Parliament as Bill C-4 and would apply to a taxable income of up to $550,000 in 2026, that is essential. This change would ensure that 22 million Canadians would benefit from tax relief up to $420 per person, saving two-income families up to $840 this year.

We are making many initiatives happen to support Canadians. It is a tough time for Canadians, and these measures, along with other measures, focus on businesses, business support and sector support. Building Canada strong is not just a slogan. It has deep meaning in terms of building Canada and building for Canadians with Canadian workers. Together with the hub and spoke model, this is a focus on solutions over slogans.

[William Stevenson, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in December, I raised Grande Cache as an example of a remote area that is bearing the brunt of rising grocery costs. Residents of Grande Cache have been fighting for years to have their community recognized under the northern residents deduction, a program designed to acknowledge the higher costs of living in remote areas.

Grande Cache is remote. Everything costs more, including travel, access to services and groceries, but an arbitrary line on a map drawn by a bureaucrat has excluded it. That is why residents came together to launch a petition simply asking for fair treatment. If Grande Cache were to be included, some families would save more than $1,200 annually. Real money would go back into household budgets and groceries. This is a request similar to that made by Haida Gwaii in B.C., which was reclassified just last year, in 2025.

Would the government reclassify Grande Cache into zone B under this program?

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Sydney—Glace Bay, NS]

Mr. Speaker, one of the key items to think about is that the government is focused on empowering Canadians by lowering taxes and expanding opportunity while protecting vital social programs that Canadians, including those in the member's riding opposite, need, from child care to dental care to pharmacare.

We recently announced programs and highlighted one of them here: the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. The key thing is focusing on the multitude of programs that are going to lift Canadians up and help them in their time of need. That is essentially what being Canadian is all about, in my opinion. It is about helping Canadians, giving them a hand up and being there for them with programs that are going to help them, help their families, help their communities and help their industries. That is what we will continue to do.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:02 p.m.)