Debates of Feb. 3rd, 2026

Opposition Motion—Food Affordability

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Madam Speaker, the member is skirting around my remarks. I hope the member is looking to understand what an impact indicator is. When we take an action, an impact indicator helps us choose the measure that will have the greatest impact on the majority of Canadians.

I talked about the 12 million Canadians who are going to benefit from this measure. That is the impact I wanted to talk about. No, we are not forgetting seniors. This government is not leaving anyone behind. We are all Canadian, and we are all entitled to receive support.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order, because I think it is appropriate. I made an accusation of the member for Foothills, and I would like to apologize.

It was not he who made the unparliamentary remarks; it was in fact the member for Miramichi—Grand Lake. I would ask for him to take the opportunity to apologize for using the unparliamentary language.

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

He is not in his seat, so I cannot call on the hon. member to rise. We will look into the record and come back as necessary.

The hon. member for Foothills.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the outstanding member for Regina—Lewvan.

Before I get to the essence of my speech, I would ask for the indulgence of the House for just a couple of moments.

In small towns like ours, hockey is the fabric of life. Unfortunately, in my riding yesterday, that fabric became frayed. Heartbreak struck southern Alberta yesterday when three members of the Southern Alberta Mustangs were killed on their way to hockey practice. J.J. Wright and Cameron Casorso of Kamloops, and Caden Fine of Birmingham, Alabama, were killed on Highway 2.

Yesterday I had the opportunity to speak to a number of residents of that community and hear about those hockey players. They were more than just athletes; they were outstanding young men who epitomized the values of southern Alberta: commitment, hard work and dedication to community. The residents talked about these hockey players volunteering at the senior centre, playing shinny on the street with young local kids, or going out of their way to clean up the arena after a hockey game.

To the families of those hockey players, and certainly the driver, who was not at fault, I want everyone to know that our thoughts and prayers are with them.

I want to thank all the colleagues in the House who have approached me today with their condolences as well.

I would say to the Southern Alberta Mustangs hockey organization, the billets, the families and the volunteers, that we share their grief.

I would also like to take a moment to thank U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra, whom I called in a bit of a panic last night. One of these hockey players was from Alabama, and his family members were beside themselves about how they were going to deal with this tragedy and get their son home. He called me immediately last night and walked me through the process, which I shared with the family. From my residents, I share a heartfelt thanks to the ambassador.

Finally, on behalf of the entire Foothills community, we send our deepest condolences to the hockey organization, the families, the people and the volunteers in Stavely and all of southern Alberta. We are with them in this time of unimaginable sorrow.

Now it is hard to move on, but I am very thankful for that moment.

We are talking about another big issue, certainly, for families in Foothills and right across the country, which is food inflation and the inability of families to afford to put food on the table.

I would like to go back to where this debate actually started, which was before Thanksgiving of 2023, when the now finance minister got up in front of the House and said that he would stabilize food prices by Thanksgiving. That did not happen.

Then Prime Minister Trudeau got up and announced the GST rebates, once again to stabilize food prices, and that was the second promise broken.

The Liberals got up and said they had this grocery code of conduct, which would be a vital tool that, once implemented, would lower grocery prices. That has been implemented, and every single expert we have talked to has said that the grocery code of conduct was never designed to lower food prices.

Every single time the Liberal government stands up and talks about its promise to Canadians to lower and stabilize food prices, it is another promise broken. Therefore, members will have to excuse me, my colleagues and certainly many Canadians when the Prime Minister got up in front of a grocery store and once again brought out the same tired Trudeau GST rebate that did not work the first time and tried to sell it to Canadians once again as the salve for their inability to afford grocery prices.

As the Leader of the Opposition said earlier in his speech, I found it very interesting that before the Prime Minister got up and made his announcement, all the grocery prices were removed from the shelves behind him. It was probably the first time he has been in a grocery store and had to actually look at the prices. He said during the election campaign that he did not grocery shop for himself and did not know the price of strawberries. He has people who do that for him.

Real Canadians are facing a real problem, which is their inability to afford groceries. What has happened as a result of Liberal policies is that Canada now has the highest food inflation in the G7, twice that of the United States.

The Liberal whip was proselytizing earlier today, saying that this is a global problem, and how dare the Conservatives and Canadians blame the Liberals for this issue. If it is a global problem, why is it that in Canada, food inflation is at twice the rate of the United States, our closest neighbour and most active trading partner? The U.S. is not facing these same problems.

Let us take a look at what we have in Canada compared to what they have in the United States. Why is Canada facing food inflation at a rate far outpacing our nearest neighbour? Number one is the industrial carbon tax. Does the United States have an industrial carbon tax? No, it does not. An industrial carbon tax increases costs on every link in the supply chain. I do not know of any economy on the planet where they increase taxes and expect it not to also increase the prices of the products that economy produces. That is number one.

Number two is the fuel standard tax. We say it is a hidden tax, but the Liberals say it does not even exist, that it is imaginary. Well, how do the Liberals have an imaginary tax in their budget? Maybe their budget is also imaginary, and I am sure many Canadians wish that were the case. In the Liberal budget, it says it will cost Canadians 7¢ a litre on gas and diesel, a tax that will go up to 17¢ a litre in four years.

Again, I would ask any economist: If taxes on fuel are increased, would they not expect that to also increase the cost of products at the end of that production line? Well, of course they would. I can guarantee that Shell, Esso, Petro-Canada and Costco are not eating that 17¢ a litre. It is going directly to the drivers who drive the food, farmers who grow the food, processors who process the food and certainly retailers who sell the food.

The United States also does not have a plastics ban on food packaging. The United States also does not put tariffs on fertilizer that it imports into the United States. The United States also does not have new bulk labelling rules on fertilizer. Canada is bringing in those new rules. With just the P2 plastics ban, the bulk labelling on fertilizer packaging and the new plastics labelling rules, experts in the industry say those three things combined will add $15 billion to the cost of products in Canada. That is not imaginary. Those are very real numbers that will be passed on to the consumer. No industry is going to absolve or absorb those costs.

Let us go through a very simplistic supply chain. That product, and everything that makes that product, is going to be transported by train, car and/or truck, processed, packaged and then transported to the retailer. Every step along the way, it is paying that tax. Thus, those taxes will be passed on to the consumer, driving up food prices.

Now the average Canadian family is going to be spending almost $18,000 on groceries, double what the weekly grocery bill was under the Conservatives. It was $160 a week; now it is $340 a week. Those are facts, not imaginary, and they are a result of these taxes that are put on by the Liberals.

In my last minute, I want to mention that yesterday the Minister of Foreign Affairs made a comment that at a time when certain countries are cutting research, at a time when academic freedom is under attack, we believe in science and we believe in research. I found that hilarious, as the Liberals have announced that they are shutting down seven agricultural research centres across Canada, and there is not a region of Canada that is not being targeted: Indian Head, Saskatchewan; Lacombe, Alberta; Quebec City, Quebec; Nappan, Nova Scotia; and Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.

There is a great comment in the National Post, which I thought encapsulated this very well:

On large scales and long timelines, public agriculture research translates into more affordable, more secure food. Science takes time, so it’s likely going to be years before we can fully quantify [the impact of] what this loss means for the country.

At a time when the Liberals are talking about supporting research and science, they are closing down seven critical research centres in Canada, going back to tired Liberal policies like a GST rebate that did not lower grocery prices last time and is not going to lower the price of a single item at the grocery store this time either. They need to support our motion, an actual plan to address affordable food in Canada.

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

Before we go to questions and comments, I will just remind hon. members not to use the papers too close to the microphones. The noise is very upsetting for the interpreters.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

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

Madam Speaker, I wonder if the member can explain to me how, using his logic, there were years, 2022 and 2023, when Canada's food inflation was less than the United States' food inflation, and we had the carbon tax in place at that point. I am thinking in terms of the comments that you made, implying it is the industrial carbon tax that has caused our food inflation to be higher than that of the United States. What happened to that principle before, when Canada's food inflation was less than the U.S.A.'s food inflation?

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

This is a little reminder to the hon. parliamentary secretary that I did not imply anything.

The hon. member for Foothills.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, perhaps Canadian consumers would wish the Liberals had stopped at the consumer carbon tax, but when we have a consumer carbon tax, and then we add an industrial carbon tax, a fuel standard tax, a P2 plastics ban, bulk labelling on fertilizer and now new labelling rules that, as I said, add $15 billion to the cost of producing food, that is why we see food inflation go from something that may have been manageable to now being 6%, or twice the rate of the United States, which does not have the same regulatory regimes and uncompetitive tax policies.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, earlier I was telling a Conservative member that I was rather surprised by the connection being made between the carbon tax and food inflation. However, a connection can be made with the cost of energy. High energy costs can, in fact, cause inflation. A proper analysis of energy costs will show that, since 2021, oil companies have drastically increased their refining margins to the point where they made $131 billion in profits from 2021 to 2024. My Conservative colleagues seem to think that it is still not enough.

I would like to know whether my colleague agrees with me that, instead of ending standards that are essential to the energy transition, we should ask the greedy oil companies to do their part by reducing their margins so that we can reduce inflation.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, my colleague's question gives me an opportunity to comment on another point made by my colleague, the whip of the Liberal Party, who talked about how he does not like to hear from the food professor. They only like their experts, but not ours. I want to articulate the fact that when we quote the food professor, we are many times talking about the food price report. As my colleague mentioned, energy was an issue in there, related to the cost of food and the reliance on energy. We need to ensure that we have more options when it comes to energy security, which means food security, but the food price report was written and put together by dozens of different scientists from across the country. This is not just one expert whom we are quoting. This is a document produced based on the work of dozens and dozens of scientists and experts right across the country.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to share with my colleague from Foothills that the thoughts and prayers of those in Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan are with him and his riding.

During his intervention, my colleague was talking about the increased cost of food, and I just received an email from someone in my riding, saying that their old age pension went up by $2.43 a month, which is $29 a year. Their question was how they could get by, given all the increases that they have.

We have talked about the carbon tax. The carbon tax is embedded in the costs that are throughout the food supply chain, so I would like for my colleague to just share a little more. Would he agree with me that maybe those costs should be revealed to the people of Canada who go to the grocery store, so that when they see the labels, they understand where the taxes are going and what—

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

The hon. member for Foothills.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, I think that is an excellent point. This is the difference, in terms of why the Liberals were willing to throw their principles away and get rid of the consumer carbon tax. They made the mistake of actually having it on receipts and bills, where Canadians could see it. That is why they have no problem increasing the industrial carbon tax and the fuel tax. They are right. They can say it is imaginary because consumers cannot see it, because it is not on the bill. If they want to do it right, put it on the—

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

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Foothills for his amazing speech. The start was something that hits home for me, being from Saskatchewan. We had the Humboldt bus crash a few years ago. Whenever there is a tragedy in the hockey community, it hits everyone pretty hard. A few years ago, I used to think about it from the perspective of being a hockey player myself, playing some hockey and travelling on buses. I now think about my kids being on those buses.

From Regina—Lewvan and all across Saskatchewan, to the member for Foothills, to the families, to the Mustangs hockey team and all of their extended families, our hearts are with them. It is a very tough time. Our hearts go out to everyone involved: best wishes and God bless them.

I will now transition, like my colleague did, to talking about our opposition motion. I really want to start by reading out what the opposition motion is. I think that, a lot of times, some of our colleagues maybe just get their direction on how to vote from the whip's office over on the Liberal side, and they have not read the motion. I would like to see what they disagree with in the motion. I am going to read the motion:

That, given that the finance minister promised in October 2023 that food prices would stabilize “soon” and that the Prime Minister stated in May 2025 that he would be judged by the prices at the grocery store, and that,

(i) Canadians face the highest food inflation in the G7,

(ii) food inflation is twice as high as it was when the Prime Minister took office,

(iii) food inflation in Canada is twice as high as it is in the United States,

(iv) Canadians made 2.2 million visits a month to food banks,

(v) food bank use has more than doubled since the Liberals took power,

the House call on the government to immediately introduce a Food Affordability Plan that:

(a) removes the Liberals' hidden taxes on food, including,

(i) the industrial carbon tax on farm equipment, fertilizer, and food processors, that drives up the costs of producing food and are passed onto consumers,

(ii) the fuel standards tax, which is seven cents a litre—

This is according to Environment Canada's own numbers.

—and rising to 17 cents a litre on farmers, truckers, and those who bring us our food,

(iii) the food packaging tax that will cost Canadians $1.3 billion; and

(b) boosts competition in our overly-concentrated grocery sector.

My questions and comments are going to be around this: What is there to disagree with in this?

The Liberals always say that there are no hidden food taxes. I am going to read a quote from Sylvain Charlebois, who was on the Evan Bray Show in Saskatchewan, one of our most popular call-in shows, I might add. This is exactly what Sylvain Charlebois, the food professor, said on the Evan Bray Show:

I’ve always believed that taxing food is immoral. It shouldn’t happen, but it is happening, and a lot of people think that we’re only taxing bad food. That’s actually not true, because for inflation, there are more and more products being impacted. We have some goofy fiscal rules in Canada. For example, if you buy two muffins and it’s over $4, it’s not taxable. Under $4, it is taxable. If you buy four muffins, then that’s not taxable. If you buy five granola bars, that’s taxable. Six is not taxable. I mean, it’s all over the place and it’s very confusing. And I’ve always believed that when you get to the till, a lot of people don’t even look at their receipts, but you’d be surprised how much taxes you actually pay.

That combats some of the conversation we have had from the Liberal side of the aisle, when the food professor has laid out some of the taxes that are paid on groceries when one is at the grocery store. I pack lunches, not as many lunches as my wife packs, obviously, because I am here a bit more. Our kids take muffins and granola bars and sandwich meat and bread and cheese to make sandwiches. They all take that for school lunches. Those are all taxed because they are processed. The Liberals never really complete that end of the story.

I know it is hitting people harder and harder. We have a lot of families. As I said off the top, when we were talking about hockey, my three kids all play hockey, and many, many parents now are packing groceries to take on these trips when we are going to different towns. One of the parents was amazed. We were going on a trip for two days, and they went and bought fruit, vegetables, sandwich meat, cheese and buns. It was two bags of groceries. It was $187. That makes it harder and harder to get by. I am not sure if some of my colleagues across the way are not having these same conversations with parents or with seniors. My colleague from Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan just brought up an excellent point about how little the increase is that seniors have been getting. How do they expect to keep up with the rising cost of groceries?

As has been stated, the cost of groceries is going to go up $1,000 this year for a family of four. I do not know of any benefit that is going to keep up with that rise in the cost of food.

Another comment I am wondering about is in respect to the fuel standard tax, which costs seven cents a litre and will be rising to 17¢ a litre. My colleagues across the way are always saying that there are no hidden taxes on groceries. In question period today, our leader informed the Prime Minister, who did not know, that it came from the documents of ECCC, Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Our leader had a very good question for the Prime Minister that was not answered. Are we supposed to believe what the Prime Minister said, which is that there is no clean fuel tax, or ECCC's documents, which say that the clean fuel tax is going to add 17¢ a litre to gasoline by 2030? I think I will take the department's advice since it has the experts.

As my colleague from Foothills said, if anyone thinks that an increase in fuel prices does not affect the price at their grocery store, either they are lying to themselves or they are lying to each other, because all food at grocery stores is trucked from all over this country and all over North America with our interconnected supply chains.

One thing that I want to make very clear right now to the six or seven people watching this is that tariffs do not affect food prices. There are very minimal tariffs on any food coming into this country. The Liberals try to conflate that and make it a global problem, but it is actually untrue. There are very few tariffs affecting the prices at the grocery store. The Liberals should take responsibility for what they have caused over the past 10 years.

I remember when I asked about this in question period: The finance minister stood up in 2023 and said that they would stabilize grocery prices by Thanksgiving. That was almost three years ago, and they brought out the same program as the one they brought out a couple of days ago, a rebate program.

I want everyone out there to know that they would get $10 a week with this rebate program. Most Canadians are spending $300 a week on their grocery bill, so they would get a $10 coupon for a $300 grocery bill. Sure, it is nice and people would take it, but it would not change the fact that food prices continue to go up.

We want to look at the root of this problem of food price inflation, and we need to look at what we are doing domestically. TD brought out a report today that says that two-thirds of the cause of food prices is domestic policy. That means that we need to look at what we are doing and what the Liberals have been doing to not combat food prices. That means the industrial carbon tax, the fuel standard and the packaging price that my friend talked about, which is $1.3 billion to change plastic packaging.

Not using plastic packaging is going to really add to the food waste in this country. Processors said this at the agriculture committee. I know the agriculture minister sits at the kids' table and does not get to make a bunch of decisions, but the fact that we are trying to tie the hands of food processors in their ability to transport food safely and make sure that it is preserved and has a longer shelf life is a problem that the Liberals have made internally. That is laid completely at their feet.

We have read out the motion. We have put down some clear guidelines for what we would like to see in a food affordability plan. I would ask some of my Liberal colleagues to look at this motion line by line. Some of it might not feel good. Reading that 2.2 million people are visiting the food banks is not a good-news story, but it is happening in our country.

We are the breadbasket of the world. We have the best producers and the best farmers, and we should have the ability to feed our own population. A lot of that inability and a lot of that food inflation is because of the policies that have been put forward by the government in the last 10 years.

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

Madam Speaker, the member was a big part of the speeches delivered by the Conservative Party 18 months ago, when we were hearing the Conservatives say on a daily basis that if we got rid of the carbon tax, inflation would be gone. It was going to resolve all the problems dealing with inflation. The government was being told to get rid of the carbon tax.

Canada's new Prime Minister made a commitment, and we got rid of the carbon tax, as everyone knows. He got rid of it in order to increase the disposable income of Canadians. That is the reason it was gotten rid of. The impact on food inflation was nowhere near what the Conservatives predicted it would be.

Why should Canadians believe Conservative ideas like what we are hearing today when their other ideas are such disasters?

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, that question would have a little more validity if the Liberals would stop stealing our ideas. Taking the GST off first-time homebuyers was our idea in the campaign plan, and they took it. Removing the consumer carbon tax was our idea, and they took it. Providing a first-time homebuyer account so Canadians can save money when buying their first home was our idea, and they took it.

As the Conservative leader has said, we want to work together and get better results for Canadians. The member standing up to say we do not have any good ideas would have a lot more credibility if Liberals stopped stealing our ideas. We are okay with that, but they should go all the way. They should get rid of the consumer and the industrial carbon taxes and scrap the food packaging tax.

We have so many more ideas. If they want to take them, they can go ahead, but they should do a better job of implementing them.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is not news to anybody, and it certainly will not be to this member, that the Prime Minister really loves to self-identify as a European. It seems that he came back for European countries, but not necessarily for ours.

To that end, I think every farmer and expert would say that over the last 10 years, the same government that he advised has been implementing, when it comes to agriculture, policy-based evidence, not evidence-based policy. I wonder if the member might comment on some of those European policies around grain production, livestock transportation and all the other policies, taxes and bans that Liberals try to apply here and that just drive up costs for farmers, producers and the people who buy the food. It is almost like they do not know where their food comes from.

Would the member comment on that?

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

That is a tough but very fair question, Madam Speaker. I thank my colleague for being a continuous advocate for her people in Lakeland.

The problem is that there is less and less rural representation on the Liberal side. They are getting further away from the people who produce the food, the fuel and the fertilizer that run this country. It would be wonderful if they would take more opportunities to maybe get out of downtown Toronto, downtown Vancouver, downtown Halifax or Moncton.

I hear some of my colleagues talking. I think I hit a nerve, because some of them could not find rural Canada with a compass. That is something used to find direction with. If they took some time to actually visit some of the producers on the ground, they would hear that the industrial carbon tax is affecting their fuel and that the fuel standard is affecting their fuel and their bottom line and is making things more expensive. Some of those practical—

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

We have to leave some time for more questions.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Yorkton—Melville.

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

Madam Speaker, we all know that Liberals want us to buy from Canada, and food in Canada is the best. However, it requires fertilizer. We heard about a number of issues where the government is attacking our farmers and all types of foods that farmers grow. Now, on top of what has been mentioned already, the government wants them to grow more canola and more grains but use 30% less fertilizer by 2030. That is four or five years from now.

Our food security is at risk, and I would like the member to speak a bit about that issue.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. The government is always asking our producers to do more with less, and that fertilizer reduction is an example of that. Our farmers would do better.

I hear the member from northern Saskatchewan chatting. I worked with him for many years, and everywhere he goes, I have to clean up his mess.

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

Order. It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Vancouver East, Housing; the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni, Natural Resources; the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, Finance.

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

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time.

First, I must respond to the comment from my colleague across the way about my friend and colleague from northern Saskatchewan, who has actually done more in the last 10 months than the 13 members of Parliament who sit representing Saskatchewan in the Conservative Party have in the last decade. Quite frankly, it is truly amazing. Maybe that is a good area to kind of pick up on. Let us take a look at what I would classify as a flash of reality for members opposite.

I have had the opportunity to ask a few questions today about why Canadians should believe the Conservatives on the type of ideas they are presenting today. We can do a reflection on some of the ideas their current leader has had over the last number of years. Do members remember, years ago, cryptocurrency and how many seniors lost money, possibly because of the leader of the Conservative Party's saying he loved cryptocurrency, and maybe even implying that it should be a great alternative to the Canadian dollar? People lost a lot of money on that.

Then the Conservatives had the other idea. They are going to fire—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!