Debates of Feb. 3rd, 2026

Opposition Motion—Food Affordability

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I will remind the member that we voted against their measures because they are band-aid solutions and they do not actually work. I also want to correct the record. I know the previous speaker, the member for Kings—Hants, made a comment that the Conservatives said the consumer carbon tax was the only issue causing the affordability crisis. This is 100% not true. We know it is the Liberals' inflationary spending, the fact that they print money like it is nobody's business and the fact that they do not respect the Canadian taxpayer. The Liberals seem to be very good at lecturing Canadians, telling them where to spend their money, and then taking their money and saying they can apply for this program and the Liberals will give them a little bit back.

Why is it that the Liberals seem to always tax Canadians and always lecture Canadians, instead of putting in long-term solutions that will make life more affordable?

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, let me just say that we are putting long-term measures in place. These include the national food security strategy, which I just discussed, measures in budget 2025 that will stimulate investment and attract foreign investment and our efforts to diversify our international trading partnerships. All of these measures have the potential to transform the Canadian economy, strengthen it and make it more resilient, which will lead to higher wages and new job opportunities for Canadians.

In contrast, members on the other side of the House always resort to rhetoric and repeat the same arguments. When it is time to be there for Canadians, those members are nowhere to be found. They vote against supporting the school food program, against helping people with modest and low incomes, and against measures to strengthen the Canadian economy.

Members on this side of the House mean business; we translate talk into real action. We do not deliver meaningless speeches and vote against every measure to help people.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question about food production costs and the labour shortage in the agri-food sector. What is his government proposing to address this shortage?

There is also the issue of climate change, which is causing floods, droughts and wildfires, all of which have a direct impact on food production in this country. The government recently backtracked on many of the environmental protection measures taken during Justin Trudeau's 10 years in office.

What could the government do to better protect the environment?

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, there are several parts to my colleague's question. He mentioned the potential impact of floods and droughts on the cost of food. I could not agree with him more.

That is why we need to improve Canada's ability to prevent floods and droughts. Incidentally, my colleague from Terrebonne introduced a private member's bill calling on Canada to adopt a national strategy in this regard. We voted on the bill at second reading last December 3, and I was very surprised to see my Bloc Québécois colleagues oppose it. In 2024, however, Bloc Québécois members voted in favour of the same version of the bill, which died on the Order Paper when the 2025 election was called. I have a hard time understanding that.

We are being told that preventing floods and droughts is important, yet when members on this side of the House introduce concrete measures, such as a bill to establish a national strategy for better flood and drought prevention, Bloc Québécois members vote against it.

Is this or is this not an important issue to them? I am having a little trouble figuring that out.

[Jessica Fancy-Landry, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche for being a rural advocate for a lot of the people here in the country.

I would also like to talk today about the $20 million to the local food infrastructure fund. I wonder if my colleague could speak to that a bit more and how it aims to deliver more nutritious food to families, not only in his riding and my riding but in all of Canada.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her wonderful question. I think increasing funding by $20 million is an excellent decision. This will help food banks across the country.

The federal government already supports food banks through funding that is sent to regional and provincial organizations, which in turn share the funding equitably with food banks in the communities we represent here in Ottawa. We are aware that the rising cost of living is putting pressure on food banks. This additional $20 million in funding is certainly welcome.

We are implementing long-term measures to address the causes of food insecurity, but in the immediate term, Canadians need help. I believe this is a measure that will be appreciated on the ground.

I would also like to take this opportunity to highlight the exemplary work of food bank volunteers and employees, who provide an essential service to people in our communities. I thank them for their efforts.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the Leader of the Opposition.

I rise today to speak to an issue that affects every single one of us: the rising cost of food in Canada. When Canadians get to the checkout line at the grocery store, they feel it. It is a daily frustration that has grown worse year after year. Food prices are not just numbers on a receipt. They reflect how difficult it has become for many families to put healthy meals on the table.

Let us begin with the facts. By late 2025, and into early 2026, food prices continued their sharp climb. In December alone, food prices were up 6.2%, grocery prices rose roughly 5% and takeout meals jumped 8.5%. Canada has now earned the unfortunate distinction of being the food inflation capital of the G7.

According to Dalhousie University's 2026 Canada food price report, food costs are expected to rise another 4% to 6%. For the average family of four, that means spending more than $17,500 on food in 2026, nearly $1,000 more than last year. Over the past five years, food prices have surged by approximately 27%. Staple items, such as beef, saw dramatic spikes, rising nearly 19% in 2025.

Why is this happening? There is no single cause, but there are several forces pushing prices higher. Energy and input costs remain elevated. The costs for fuel for transportation and fertilizer for farmers, as well as for labour throughout the supply chain, feed directly into what Canadians pay at the till. As Conservatives have pointed out for years, when trucks, trains and ships cost more to operate, those increased costs do not disappear; they are passed on to consumers. We cannot debate reality. Higher input costs mean higher grocery bills.

The impact on Canadians is severe. Today, one in four households is facing food insecurity. Families are cutting back on healthy foods. Parents are skipping meals. Even Canadians who are working full time are turning to food banks.

At this time, I want to give a shout-out to Sudbury Food Bank's friendship house, which I visited in my riding, in my hometown. I was truly impressed by the dedication of the volunteers and the generosity of our local businesses. The food bank is an essential part of our community, and I thank them for making a difference.

Researchers now tell us that grocery prices top the list of financial worries for Canadians. When rising food costs are combined with higher prices for rent, energy and other essentials, many Canadians reach a breaking point.

The government has introduced the Canada groceries and essentials benefit, which would provide one-time top-ups and ongoing increases for low- and modest-income Canadians. We will support this measure. It is a small but welcome step, especially for low- and modest-income earners in my riding of Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, but band-aid solutions can only go so far. We need to rip off the band-aid and make real changes to make life more affordable.

Conservatives will continue to put forward real, practical measures to make life more affordable for Canadians. Our food affordability plan would remove the hidden taxes on food by ending the industrial carbon tax, the fuel standard tax and the food packaging tax. We have debated these measures in the House for months. The Liberals dismissed them as imaginary or non-existent. We can call them what we want, either direct taxes or indirect taxes, but I want the people of northern Ontario and all Canadians to clearly understand that these are all costs that have been imposed by the government.

The industrial carbon tax increases costs for farmers, who grow our food, and those who transport it. It raises the price of farm fuel, fertilizer, trucking and freight. It increases costs at every stage of the supply chain, and those costs eventually land on consumers. It is not imaginary; it is real, measurable and paid for by Canadians.

Canada's clean fuel regulations act as a hidden tax by requiring producers to reduce the carbon intensity of fuels, raising gas prices by an estimated seven cents per litre in 2026, and that will go up to 17¢ by 2030. This policy increases the costs for consumers and businesses. They are not directly listed on fuel receipts, but are hidden as additional production costs imposed by the government. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation suggests the policy could cost the economy billions and increase household expenses. These costs are a burden to the consumer and are definitely real, not imaginary.

Then there is the food packaging tax, which the Liberals call imaginary and non-existent. It is a play on words. Although there is no stand-alone tax called a food packaging tax, proposed federal packaging and plastic regulations would have tax-like cost impacts. These rules would significantly raise costs for food producers, grocers and consumers. Fresh produce could increase up to 34% and may cost the average Canadian household about $400 more per year.

Those are real dollars coming out of the pockets of families in northern Ontario and across the country. They are not imaginary. With Canadians simply working to live rather than living well from the work they do, the government should be making it easier to afford groceries, not harder with hidden taxes.

The Prime Minister often speaks about a team Canada approach. This is an opportunity to put those words into action. The Conservative food affordability plan offers practical, long-term solutions that would relieve pressure on families, lower grocery bills and make life more affordable for all Canadians. These measures are realistic, effective, and can be implemented without delay. By supporting this plan, the government would demonstrate a genuine willingness to work together for the good of Canadians, especially those who are struggling right now. Conservatives stand ready to work with the government to deliver real relief and build a more stable and sustainable food system that works for Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, I find that Conservative ideas really do not work. Members can think about it.

The Conservatives said we should get rid of the carbon tax. Do members remember the hundreds of speeches they gave on that? That was supposed to get rid of inflation, period. The new Prime Minister of Canada actually made the decision to get rid of the carbon tax so that we could increase the disposable income for Canadians.

Let us take a look at the past year. Over the last five years, Canada has done relatively well on food inflation. When we look at this year, it is a little higher than we would like. That is why we brought in Bill C-19. That is why it will likely pass this week, to support Canadians.

Does the member truly believe his policy is worth the effort?

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I give all due respect to the elimination of the carbon tax, its effect on the economy and the price of food. It just goes to show that, although the carbon tax was eliminated, a Canada fuel clean tax has been implemented. It is seven cents now and growing to 17¢ in 2030.

By the way, you eliminated the carbon tax because of the pressure from us. Now it will be transferred to the Canada fuel tax. Ironically, the carbon tax was 17¢ when it was eliminated, and the hidden tax, which you are not showing Canadians, is going to be a 17¢ tax by—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I have to interrupt the member.

I would remind the member to speak through the Chair. The Chair is not responsible for government actions.

The hon. member for La Pointe-de-l'Île.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, who is also a member of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

First, I would like to know how he explains the fact that the Liberals eliminated the carbon tax and yet there has been no impact on the cost of food. Second, does he see a link between climate change and the effects of pollution, like floods and wildfires, which are having an impact on farmers and the cost of food?

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let me say that the tax on fuel paid by consumers is not the only factor that influences the cost of food. There are a number of other factors. The Liberal government's spending and the money it is pouring into the system are not helping.

As for the climate, if we believe in the environment and climate, we have to understand that Canada ranks 39th or 40th in the world in terms of population, although it has one of the largest landmasses—the second or third largest. We need to develop our natural resources so we can export them to countries that have a coal-fired economy—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I must interrupt the hon. member.

Continuing with questions and comments, the hon. member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek has the floor.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague gave an excellent speech in which he noted that higher input costs mean higher grocery bills.

I am wondering if the member would speak to how these hidden taxes are contributing to the fact that we have the highest food inflation in the G7.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the three factors above us today, the industrial carbon tax, the Canada fuel tax and the packaging tax, are all factors that concern us and contribute to the cost of food. Some people may say that is not true, but as a small business person, I can say that any costs that affect the cost of machinery or the cost to operate machinery affect costs throughout the supply chain.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve to be able to buy enough groceries and to have a full fridge and a full bank account. Unfortunately, that is no longer the case today. After 10 years of inflationary taxes and deficits, the cost of groceries has nearly doubled. The average family will have to spend $17,600 on food this year. That is a huge increase. Right now, 2.2 million Canadians are relying on food banks every month because they simply cannot afford to pay for food. This is becoming a crisis because too many people are unable to put food on the table.

A few years ago, the Liberals said they had a solution. The current Minister of Finance and National Revenue announced in 2023 that he would stabilize grocery prices by Thanksgiving that year. It is now February 2026, and Canada has the highest food inflation in the G7. That inflation rate has doubled since the Prime Minister came to power, and yet he promised affordable grocery prices. We have reached a point where Canadians can no longer pay their bills.

The solution proposed by the government is to reintroduce a GST credit that was originally put in place by Justin Trudeau a few years ago. The credit will give a minority of families about $10 per week, while most Canadians will get nothing. A small minority will receive a maximum amount of $10 per week to pay their $300 weekly grocery bill. If people are spending $300 at the grocery store and the government gives them a $10 voucher, of course they are going to accept it, but that is not going to pay the bills. That is not going to make much of a difference at all.

Worse still, piling another $12 billion in inflationary debt on Canadians is going to cause further inflation and drive up the price of everything. We know that some people are desperate and need this credit. That is why we are going to allow this measure to pass. However, no one should be saying that this is going to save the world. This is another illusion from this Prime Minister, who has made big promises and big announcements with no results. When he made this announcement, he had the price tags behind him at the grocery store where he held his press conference removed. He was so ashamed of the prices that he is forcing Canadians to pay that he chose to have them taken down. That is another illusion.

Canadians do not live in an illusion; they live in reality. An hour after the Prime Minister left the grocery store, the prices were put back up. He is not a magician who can make prices disappear. In fact, he is making them go up by imposing an industrial carbon tax that applies to the steel used in agricultural equipment, to fertilizers, to factories that process our food and to other things related to agri-food production.

There is also a new tax called the clean fuel regulations. It is not really a regulation; it is a tax that, according to Environment Canada, will increase the price of diesel and gasoline by 7¢ per litre this year and by 17¢ per litre over the next four years. This tax is even worse than the carbon tax that the Conservatives forced the government to abolish, because at least the government was offering a rebate for that and it did not apply to tractors and other farm equipment or to fishers' boats.

The new tax applies everywhere, including to fishing and farming operations. It is already significantly increasing the cost of food production because the farmers and truckers who bring us our food have to pay it. Lastly, the Prime Minister is forcing Canadians to pay a packaging tax, and the government wants to ban plastics. Phony environmentalists may think it is a good idea to ban plastic, but that will cause food to spoil much faster, and that cost will be passed on to consumers.

Let us not forget the inflationary deficits. Before entering politics, the Prime Minister admitted that deficits increase inflation. Now he is presenting us with the largest deficit in the history of Canada, except during the COVID‑19 pandemic. The deficit has doubled since Mr. Trudeau left office. This deficit is obviously causing widespread inflation across our economy. The cost of government is driving up the cost of living.

We are here to offer solutions. We are proposing that the government adopt our affordability plan and remove all carbon taxes to reduce the cost of gasoline and diesel by 7¢ a litre. Let us get rid of the taxes on steel, on farm equipment and on fertilizer. Let us get rid of the taxes on the production and transportation of our food and allow Canadians to use plastic to preserve their food longer.

We need to trim government fat. We need to put the government on a diet so that Canadians can afford to eat. It is just awful that Canadians have to cut back on what they eat in order to feed a government that is morbidly obese. We need to cut back on the bureaucracy, the consultants, cronyism, foreign aid and handouts to bogus refugees in order to reduce the size of the government and lower the cost of living for Canadians.

Our goal is to make Canada affordable. Considering all the land and natural resources we have, our country should be the most affordable in the world. That is our goal. We are prepared to work with the government and with anyone else to achieve that goal.

Let us work together to make life affordable.

After 10 years of the Liberal government, we now have the worst food inflation anywhere in the G7. Food prices are rising faster than in all of those other countries and twice as fast as when the Prime Minister took office.

The good news is that global factors cannot be to blame. It is not tariffs applied by the Americans, because those tariffs do not apply to Canadian-consumed food. Also, we would not have lower inflation in all the other G7 countries if it really was tariffs. It is a homemade inflation crisis caused by Liberal taxes, on fuel, on the metals that go into our farm equipment and on fertilizer, and the new regulations that prevent us from preserving our food with single-use plastics.

We propose to eliminate all of these taxes and costly red tape, to promote more competition in our grocery sector, because our mission is to work with all Canadians and with all parties to make this a country where one can have a full stomach, a full fridge and a full bank account all at once. One should be able to have a good meal for a good price in Canada. This should be the most affordable country in the world, because we have the most farmland on which to grow food, and we have among the greatest supplies of energy to help in food production.

Let us remove the one thing that is causing the price inflation, which is the costly Liberal government. We can remove those costs and unleash the production of affordable, nutritious, delicious food that will help our people be healthier and stronger but will also ensure that we are more autonomous and self-reliant. A nation that feeds its people is a nation that stands on its own feet and is truly sovereign.

[Carlos Leitão, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition just said that the government and government policies are responsible for causing inflation in Canada.

How does he account for the fact that inflation is 2.4% in Canada when Canada was one of the first G7 countries to get its inflation rate under control?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is not true: Inflation is not under control here in Canada. Just ask the single moms trying to feed their kids. I want my colleague to go visit a grocery store and tell a single mother that inflation is under control as she puts items back on the shelf because she cannot afford them. He will concede that food inflation in Canada is the worst in the G7, that Canadians pay more and that inflation is twice as high in Canada as it is in the United States. This is a direct result of the inflationary taxes and deficits imposed by this Prime Minister.

We judge the government by its results, not by its rhetoric.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what the Leader of the Opposition thinks about the fact that the government opposite's scrapping of the carbon tax has had no impact on food prices.

I would also like to know whether he believes that rising food prices can be attributed to the industrial carbon tax and environmental laws alone. Do any other factors come into play?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the government did not scrap the carbon tax; it removed one tax to raise two others.

First, on the clean fuel regulations, I have in front of me a document provided by Environment and Climate Change Canada that shows that, this year, it is a 7¢-a-litre tax. It is even worse than the original carbon tax, since it applies to farms and fishing boats. At least there was an exemption from the other tax. It also applies in Quebec, since these are national regulations that bring up the cost of living. The industrial tax applies to fertilizer.

Second, are taxes alone driving up food prices? Inflationary deficits are also increasing the supply of money and inflating the price of everything. That is the inflation tax. Canadians are paying it. The cost of government is bringing up the cost of living. We need to turn that around. Affordable government means affordable living for all Canadians.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today the Bank of Canada's report clearly says that two-thirds of the food prices we see today have to do with domestic factors and not with anything else.

Could the leader please talk a bit more about those factors, including the inputs that go into food, and what the Conservative plan would be to get us out of this hellhole that the Liberals have put us in, which made Canada's food inflation the highest in the G7?

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Before I recognize the leader of the official opposition, I want to remind members to be careful with the words they use in the chamber. They do sometimes cause a reaction.

The hon. leader of the official opposition.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that we have the highest food inflation in the G7. We have heard Liberal members make all kinds of excuses today. They claim it has to do with some storms in other countries or tariffs that do not apply to Canadian food. If that were true, then all of the other countries would be experiencing the same level of food inflation. They are not. They all live on the same planet, they all have the same tariffs, and yet food inflation is lower in the U.K., France, Italy, Germany, the U.S. and Japan. They all have much lower food inflation than we have here in Canada, which means something is happening in Canada that is uniquely driving up the cost of food.

We have identified the problem. The Prime Minister is taxing the entire food chain. He taxes the the fertilizer that goes in the ground, the farm equipment and the food processors. He then makes it harder to store and secure our food.

We must remove the cost of government so that Canadians can afford the cost of food.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to address the House on this very important matter. I will say at the outset that I will be splitting my time with the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River.

This is an important debate. My colleagues might be surprised across the way, but I want to thank them for raising it. Though it is interesting how they politicize it, this is exactly the type of issue that we need to be addressing as parliamentarians: the everyday challenges of our constituents and the everyday challenges of Canadians across the land. In fact, the Prime Minister, in the noted speech that he gave in Davos just a few weeks ago, talked about a rupture. That is where I want to begin my remarks today, by focusing on what that rupture means.

The upending of the Canada-U.S. relationship, which we are seeing take place in real time, is in fact exactly that. It is a rupture for this country. It is a rupture for the world, as the Prime Minister described. What that means for members of Parliament is that we have to work together. We should always do that, but particularly in this moment. As such, I want to thank my colleagues across the way and, in particular, those who work on the federal finance committee. I will be working on that committee in the next few weeks. It is an opportunity to come together and do what is right for the country.

We have challenges. As I said, our constituents certainly are faced with cost of living issues, so the introduction of the Canada groceries and essentials benefit is an important step in the right direction. This would provide a family of four up to $1,900, once the increase goes through. I have to, first of all, say I was a bit worried on Friday when I was here during question period, listening to colleagues across the way who were throwing cold water, so to speak, on the idea. I was not sure if they were going to support it. This was after the Leader of the Opposition said that it would be supported. In the end, they made the right decision. That was encouraging to see. They gave all sorts of reasons as to why they might not support it, but in the end, they came together and did the right thing.

Tonight, we will look at the matter in greater detail with the finance minister at the federal finance committee, and I look forward to hearing what colleagues have to say, all colleagues, those from our side, from the Bloc and certainly from the Conservative side. However, this is an important moment to collaborate in whatever way possible.

I wonder if this will go one step further, though. Budget 2025 has not yet fully passed. I mentioned the finance committee. We are looking at the BIA, the budget implementation act, at that committee. There is so much good in there that could be done for Canadians as we prepare for the rupture that is taking place across the world and what it means for Canada. I think about, for example, infrastructure. Time and again, I hear colleagues stand up and speak about the importance of infrastructure and communities. I do not blame them. It is a key issue. Whether we are talking about transit, whether we are talking about water systems or whether we are talking about community infrastructure, it is very important.

Any government worth its salt would get behind infrastructure and support those municipal governments that, admittedly, are under strain so often because they can only rely on the property tax base. As such, they need provincial help and they need federal help. What do they find in budget 2025? They find support for roads, for bridges and for infrastructure of all kinds, particularly the kind of infrastructure that would allow us to get our resources to market.

It is one thing to talk about what Canada has been blessed with: natural resource wealth that can serve and should serve as a foundation for our future success as a country. It is another thing to think about how we get those to market. We need all sorts of infrastructure, roads, ports and beyond, to be built up, so we can diversify in a very meaningful and lasting way.

There are colleagues who come from urban communities, and transit support is there. It is supported by this government, and I urge colleagues to get behind that, as well as outside-of-the-box thinking. It captured a bit of a tension, this focus on community infrastructure from a capital cost perspective. The construction of hospitals can be supported now by the federal government if the budget goes through. That is why I ask colleagues to go one step further, to take that spirit of collaboration that they have shown on the Canada groceries and essentials benefit and support, ultimately, the budget implementation act.

We will see what happens. I do not want to see, certainly the government does not want to see and I do not think any member of Parliament wants to see, and we are all MPs here and we have all seen what has happened in the past, the politicizing and the games playing that has happened in years past with the BIA, particularly at the finance committee. There is no need for that. There is never a need for it, but particularly now, this would be an abdication of our responsibilities. I will just put it that way.

We also find defence in the budget. I come from London, Ontario, in the region of southwestern Ontario. From a defence perspective, that region is an anchor for the country. It is so important that we support defence industries that are directly involved in the manufacture of the equipment ultimately used by the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who maintain our democracy and who help to uphold the freedom that allows us to be in this chamber and debate the issues of the day.

I will also say that there is an enormous supply chain. Mr. Speaker, I know you are from Alberta, and I see a number of colleagues across the aisle who are from Alberta. Whether it is Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec or any province, the supply chain extends wide and far in this country, from coast to coast to coast. That is why the $80 billion-plus investment in this budget is so critical to the well-being of communities, whether they are directly or indirectly involved in the manufacture of military equipment.

Now is the time to live up to our defence commitments from a NATO perspective, certainly, but also from the perspective of sovereignty. Canada is doing that. Other democracies are starting to do that. It is absolutely vital that we get behind investments like this. Along the way with an investment like this, we also have the potential for tens of thousands of jobs to be maintained or created as a result of what the government wants to do on defence.

I see the former parliamentary secretary for defence in front of me. I have respect for him as a colleague. I know that he is interested, I would even say perhaps excited, about the government's focus on defence. I would ask him and colleagues who want to ensure the sovereignty of this country to think about supporting the budget, to put politics aside, put the partisanship aside and do what is right for the country.

Today, we are talking about affordability. This budget is about affordability. To maintain or uphold a vision of affordability for Canadians, the government is also cutting taxes for 22 million Canadians. The first thing the government did when it was elected was to place a focus on exactly that. It is something the Prime Minister talked about at length in the election campaign. He committed to it. It was in our platform. I remember talking about it when I went door to door in my community of London, in London Centre specifically, and we acted on it.

We also see the national school food program being made permanent. It is a very important program because the implementation of that policy, which admittedly came under the previous government but has been continued by this government, in the context of the difficult choices that had to be made, was upheld. I think that is so critical. In terms of effects, we see young kids with food in their bellies, not having to worry about breakfast in the morning or lunch, depending on how it is structured at the school. Prior to this, we had this patchwork quilt of programs across the country that were sometimes maintained and sometimes not. What we have now is something more permanent, obviously, and the predictability that comes with that.

I will end by focusing on the importance of young families. Members have talked about young families. The $10-a-day child care is something that the government has committed to continuing. We see changes implemented in a very positive way at child care facilities across the country. This gives families more options. It is the right thing to do.

For all these reasons, I would ask the opposition, and in particular my friends in the Conservatives, to collaborate with us for the well-being of this country in the present and in the future. I look forward to questions.

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from London for his very thoughtful intervention.

The member mentioned manufacturing in London. What I am hearing from constituents in my riding that manufacture metal components for automobiles, or different implements that go into making some of our military equipment, is that they have really been hit hard with the industrial carbon tax in their manufacturing processes. When we talk about making things more affordable and wanting to keep domestic production here in Canada, it is the Liberal government's policies that have been driving innovation and production out of this country. In fact, recently we saw another 1,200 auto manufacturing jobs leaving the country.

Could the member opposite comment on why the government will not remove the industrial carbon tax to make it more affordable for our Canadian companies to produce goods here in Canada?