House of Commons Hansard #121 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was affordability.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Criminal Code Second reading of Bill S-233. The bill proposes making assaults against health care workers and first responders an aggravating sentencing factor. Conservatives emphasize the urgent need for protection against rising violence, criticizing past legislative delays. A Liberal representative welcomes the goals but notes broader government sentencing reforms, while the Bloc Québécois supports the bill while also advocating for increased health transfers to address systemic issues. 8600 words, 1 hour.
Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2 Jean-Denis Garon (Bloc) invokes Standing Order 69.1 to request a separate vote on division 17 of Bill C-31, arguing that its substantial amendments to the Canada Transportation Act are unrelated to the budget. 500 words.
Bill C-30—Time Allocation Motion Members debate a Liberal motion limiting discussion on Bill C-30. Conservative and Bloc MPs criticize the use of time allocation as a tactic to stifle debate and avoid scrutiny regarding national debt. The government defends the move, insisting that expedited passing is necessary to deliver critical affordability measures and economic support to Canadians before the parliamentary summer break. 5100 words, 30 minutes.
Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act Second reading of Bill C-30. The bill implements provisions from the spring economic update. Liberal members argue the measures provide essential affordability supports and infrastructure investment, framing them as fiscally responsible. Conversely, Conservatives characterize the legislation as a collection of short-term gimmicks that fail to address reckless government spending. Meanwhile, the Bloc Québécois and NDP highlight significant gaps, criticizing a lack of support for regional businesses and arguing the current government is taking progressives for granted. 31100 words, 4 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Premature Disclosure of a Bill and its Elements to a Third Party Xavier Barsalou-Duval raises a question of privilege, alleging the government leaked legislative details concerning Air Canada to an external party before informing the House, an accusation the Liberals and Conservatives reserve comment on. 700 words.
Ministerial Compliance with Order in Council—Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules that the government’s failure to table reports from the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise does not constitute a breach of privilege, as no law or Standing Order mandates their tabling. 800 words.
Bill C-30 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation ActGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater
The hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South is rising on a point of order. I hope it is a point of order.
Andrew Lawton Conservative Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is. There might have been an issue with the audio. I do not know if the member knew he was being asked when his office will open.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater
That is not a point of order.
The hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, like Quebeckers generally, I am a bit fed up with the centralist, exclusive vision of elite sports that Canada constantly displays. My colleague alluded to this in his speech when he said he was proud to see investments of $750 million. In the meantime, families, young people and seniors are not getting any help even though they need access to physical activity too. Where is the federal government when the time comes to build infrastructure like gyms, pools and arenas?
The need in Abitibi—Témiscamingue is desperate. I want to point out that Rouyn‑Noranda was forced to build a pool with only six lanes and that a project in Témiscamingue was cut back to the bare bones, with an investment of $18.6 million. We could search in vain to find a cheaper project in Canada. That is the bare minimum. Still, the federal government is nowhere to be found.
Why is this happening? Why is the government boasting about this economic statement? Why are members boasting about investing in sports when the government is nowhere to be found when regular folks need help?
John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize that part of the build Canada strong fund, that $51-billion build communities strong fund, also includes investment in community infrastructure, recreation infrastructure and sport infrastructure. On top of that is a specific $775 million to build up sport across Canada, as I said, from house league level all the way up to Olympic level athletes.
I completely agree with the member opposite that the federal government needs to take a leadership role in investing in sports and sports infrastructure, along with partnerships with the provinces and municipalities across Canada. That is something I will continue to advocate for.
Bill C-30 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if my colleague can provide his thoughts on the important Red Seal program we brought in. There are dozens of skilled trades with national recognition where a financial incentive is being provided for individuals, I am thinking specifically for young Canadians, to be able to enter into dozens of skilled trades. With the government providing that incentive, we are looking at somewhere in the neighbourhood of 80,000 to 100,000 potential trade jobs over the next five years.
Can the member provide his thoughts on why it is so important that we invest in Canadians?
John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, I did not get to that in my speech, but I am glad I get to answer it here. As we are investing $51 billion to build Canada strong and $13 billion in the affordable homes plan, or Build Canada Homes, we need to make sure that we have the next generation of workers in the skilled trades available to work on those projects.
I spent 20 years working in heavy civil construction, working with workers in the skilled trades directly. I know the amazing benefits those jobs have to communities, as well as the high pay and the pride workers take in the job they do when they are working in the skilled trades. Our government is investing in the next generation to make sure they have the jobs to provide for their families.
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to say that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury.
This has been quite the spring economic statement or spring economic update, whatever the government wants to call it. A lot goes into every financial statement the government puts forward. It seems that there is no shortage of money to keep pouring out, but there is a real lack of fiscal discipline. One thing I did notice about this government over the last six and a half years that I have been here is its ability to announce and announce, as if it is going to continue to do great things. Announcing things, spending money and accomplishing very little seems to be the flavour of the day and that happens all the time here. I want to go through a bunch of things in my speech here. I do not mean to just be critical, so I will also be giving some good feedback on some of the things that work in this budget.
First of all, let us talk about what my colleague across the way talked about, all the announcements of the 20 economic and defence partnerships signed in the last year. Partnerships are signatures. I would like to see what really comes out of those at the end of the day. We need to measure these outcomes. These are not just papers we sign. We are not a republic. Our Prime Minister is not a president who gets to write executive orders and say, “This is the way things are.” We are diminishing the role of the House of Commons here. We need to get back to actually doing things in the House of Commons that are good for all Canadians and include the input of people from across this country.
I went through the budget. The budget talked about a few things, and I know that the government likes the high-level stuff to start the budget. It talks about the rule of law in Canada. If we had the rule of law in Canada, we would have a very stable investment dynamic right now, which we are clearly missing. This stable, reliable financial system is one that is layered more and more on top of an oligopoly that really benefits from the weight that it maintains and that, of course, the government would like that to be.
We need to make sure we have a more diverse economy, a more open economy, an economy where people can see what the rules are and invest accordingly, not just invest when the government says, “Hey, we have some friends here, let us give them some money so they will put some more money into the economy.” That is not the way a modern, democratic country is supposed to run.
It also talked about investment attractiveness. Let me tell the House what investment attractiveness would actually mean. It would mean that the pension funds that collect money from Canadians in Canada would actually reinvest that money into Canada. Most of those pension funds invest most of their money offshore and for good reason, because this government has created an economic and investment climate in this country that does not work if we want a return on capital. That return on capital, of course, is competitive with jurisdictions around the world, even to the south of us, where we have a trade partner that is not behaving as if we actually had a trade agreement with them. We have to make sure that we actually stand up against that.
The next thing the budget talked about was tax competitiveness, but it was talked about under new business investment. All the current business investment is not taxed efficiently here in Canada. However, the government will give all kinds of tax credits if some new capital is brought into Canada. There is no clear path to what that represents as far as the rule of law going forward is concerned.
Then it talked about Canadian resources, which we are proud to stand for on this side of the House. I am sure the members know the numerous entreaties we have made to the Liberal government to make sure we actually have a better resource industry in this country, with more transparency and more ability to get some things done, because the budget did talk about transparency.
However, there is no transparency. There is a complete black hole. What are the rules today? What are the rules tomorrow? Continually changing the rules on our resource industry is what holds back investment in our most important part of our economy. I say most important not because I am trying to diminish any of the other parts of the Canadian economy, but because I want to make sure people understand how much those resource industries contribute to Canada, in employment, in taxation and in the balance of payments with our trade partners around the world. It is lopsided how much we actually benefit from the resources we export. We have to make sure that we have a level playing field that says, “Invest here, in this country, in these resources and you will get a return and there will be a line of sight on how that actually turns out for your shareholders and your company.”
Now I am going to differ with a few things the government said in this economic statement. It talked about having the second-fastest growing economy in the G7. That is great, but most of those are in Europe. Japan's in a bit of a mix right now. Compared to our neighbour to the south, we are forecast to be growing at 1.5%, and they are at 2.3%. The growth rate in the United States is one and a half times higher than our growth rate.
We are not doing that well considering who our nearest neighbour is. We have to take a step back to understand what is happening here. Part of what is happening, of course, is the lack of transparency with respect to what happens to the investments people make in Canada.
The government talked about fiscal discipline. Let me contradict it very clearly here: There is no fiscal discipline on that side of the House whatsoever.
The Liberals talk about changing from a $78-billion deficit in the fall budget to a $67-billion deficit looking forward in the spring economic statement because of $7.8 billion more in collections from the resource industry. This is how we are making our money. This is how we are getting better. However, no sooner do they see a whole bunch of new revenue coming in from taxation than they decide to spend that in a bunch of other maladjusted ways as far as investing and throwing more money out the door.
They can call it an investment, but it is a really bad use of our money. This is not a bottomless pit. Canadians need to make sure that we get back to balance at some point in time. That balance means at least a zero deficit, and hopefully a surplus at some point in time, because we have gotten massively into debt in this country. The government got cute in the spring economic statement and changed its actual fiscal anchor from a net debt to GDP and a declining deficit to a net deficit to GDP. That is because the GDP is not increasing enough.
Members would know that when we talk about GDP, we are talking about consumption plus investment, plus government expenditures, plus exports, minus imports, one of which is government expenditures. Government expenditures keep increasing and therefore keep increasing the GDP. The rest of the equation is not holding weight because it is not that investable an economy. We need to do much better in that respect.
A $67‑billion deficit is one thing, but $1.4 trillion in debt is the government's book number. Let me explain what that means. The government has borrowed almost $2 trillion. It is paying interest on almost $2 trillion through its various agencies. The difference between $2 trillion and $1.4 trillion is $600 billion, which is in the various accounts at Crown corporations and other borrowing entities, many of which have opaque accounting mechanisms where they are not writing off their debts. Therefore, when the new government comes in, we are going to have to see a massive writeoff of all the debts that the current government has accumulated and has not put on its books at this point in time.
That includes things like, of course, the Canada Infrastructure Bank. We pointed out at committee that it had $600 million‑plus in loans to Lion Electric in the first place. We have all kinds of boondoggles like that sitting in several Crown corporations that are part of the government's debt profile. They have to be more transparent. This is something that has to change going forward.
On March 27, the Liberals increased the borrowing authority to $2.54 trillion. That tells Canadians where they are going with this. We are going to have an extra half trillion dollars in debt going forward. Congratulations. There is no stopping this train.
I need to give the government credit for what it has done with respect to training and for allocating a whole bunch of money to the trades. I am very thankful for that. I would like to thank the government because that is another page from the Conservative book that it took out of our policy manual, having more money put into the trades in this country so that we have better outcomes. For that whole layer of jobs that is unfulfilled at this point in time, we need to make sure we get those technical people trained. I thank the government for putting that in there.
Something else I think the Liberals could put on there, if they are thinking about taking something else from our books, is defence. I know they have increased the money for defence. They have increased the salaries. Good for them. Now they are going for another defence procurement agency, a defence bank, and all these things where they are spending money on bureaucrats.
Here is what the Liberals need to do. They need to spend money on defence and spend money on actually getting things. The United States has rightly been complaining about how much we have not spent on defence in Canada. They should take another page from our book. In the last election, we talked about getting Iqaluit built as a base. That should be a 90‑day process: Here is the money we need to spend on this and here is where we have to get going. They should act as if there is some urgency here and get some things going.
We do not mind sharing these ideas with the government. We need to make some things happen in this country as quickly as possible. I beseech the government to take the good ideas we have presented to it and make them work going forward.
There are a whole bunch of other issues here. I would love to keep talking, because there are other things I have to talk about, but I know my time has come to an end.
Bill C-30 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I would take the member to task for his comments in regard to the degree to which this Prime Minister and this government, through their approach, are expanding Canada's economy beyond the United States. We have a Prime Minister who got commitments of billions of dollars last year. We have a Prime Minister and a government that have secured numerous signatories on trade agreements of different forms. We have passed legislation on trade agreements with Northern Ireland and Indonesia. We have trade agreements that are in the works for countries such as India, from which the biggest delegation ever, from what I understand, is in Ottawa today dealing with trade. We have commitments working with Philippines and other countries developing trade.
I wonder if he might want to retract some of his comments. We are seeing real results with trade.
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, if I have said something that upset my colleague, I apologize, because I know they are working hard, but as I said in my speech, I think it is very clear that we need to measure these outcomes. At this point in time, we have signatures on letters of intent and everything. I am saying that the Liberals should bring these paths forward to the House of Commons. Let us pass all these documents they are signing that they think are going to do better for Canada. Let us measure the results. We do have a problem south of the border that we need to deal with at this point in time. Diversifying our trade, of course, is one of the most important things we do. We will look at the results when they arrive.
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his speech.
The government boasts that it is truly the best at negotiating with the United States, yet this is producing absolutely no results at the moment, except that we appear to be lying flat on the ground, waiting for the U.S. to walk all over us. The government seems to be focused on negotiating agreements with other countries, particularly in Europe and Asia.
Meanwhile, businesses are suffering terribly. My riding of Drummond is home to an extremely vibrant manufacturing sector, but it is struggling desperately these days for a number of reasons. First, the tariffs have hit us hard. The impact has been devastating. There is also a very serious concern regarding the rules that have been put in place for the temporary foreign worker program.
When we raise these issues with the government, there is no response, no action. The Liberals seem to have no interest in solving the real problems that will cost Quebec jobs and businesses, even though solutions are within reach. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the fact that this Liberal government is incapable of walking and chewing gum at the same time and incapable of addressing real problems on the ground.
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his long question. I think I got the gist of it. It is important to have support for stakeholders in the Canadian economy right now. I wonder how the federal government will measure success when we are losing so many jobs to the United States. It is important to keep jobs here in Canada. What measures will the government put in place to mitigate the effects of this situation?
Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON
Mr. Speaker, we are all up here and have lots of questions for this member, so I am grateful that you called on me.
Last Friday, I spent some time with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers in Oshawa, and we talked about money for the trades. I can appreciate that they are giving the Liberals some props for putting money towards that, but they have a real concern, and I have one too: What about jobs? We are going to spend all this money on trades. It is great to invest in trades, but these folks need jobs when they are trained, and right now the electrical workers and folks in my riding are very concerned about that.
I wonder if the member could comment on that.
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is very important. The government talks about training people, but it does not talk about how that is actually going to fit into the economy. I know the Prime Minister made an announcement while we were not sitting in the House of Commons last week about building our electricity system across Canada. Talking about the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, we know they are going to need those jobs.
I think we have to take a good look. As I said earlier, the government has caused the problem with the electricity system in Canada because it inherited a bunch of policy advisers from the Government of Ontario who more or less botched the electricity system in Ontario for a decade. Then they moved to Ottawa and decided to botch it even further. All they seem to be able to do is add a whole bunch of money into the equation whenever those messes seem evident to everybody. We have to make sure we have a real solution here that gets people working and actually gets an electricity system that works for the whole country.
Scot Davidson Conservative New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the soup and salad bowl of Canada, home to Honda Civic and the best potatoes this side of P.E.I.
In the spring economic update, and throughout this debate, the Liberals have made it apparent that they believe Canadians have never had it so good. The Minister of Finance even introduced this update by telling us, “the dream of Canada is alive and well.” I think we need a reality check.
Let me share what is happening in my community, because it tells a very different story. Last week, my son came back from running a booth at a local job fair. He came back upset and shocked. He told me he saw hundreds of people lined up, résumés in hand, hoping for a chance to work for one of the few employers in the area still hiring. That was not the shocking part, given that the unemployment rate is now almost 7% across the country. What was shocking to him was the number of seniors in those lines.
I am lucky. My son is an old soul. He does not come to me often, but he was very upset. He told me how sad it was to see elderly men in dated suits that had not been worn in years, helped along by wives for whom just standing in that line was an immense effort. Those couples were not there out of choice or ambition. Those people had already worked their whole lives, earned for their retirement and assumed that this chapter was behind them, but now they are pushed back into the workforce because the cost of everything has risen so far and so fast.
Unfortunately, very few will manage to get a job at all. It is not just them: All generations are struggling, right across the country. Young people have given up on owning a home. Families are choosing between groceries and rent. It is infuriating that this is the reality facing our people today. This is the new normal in Canada, after 11 years of the Liberal government. Canadians are being asked to accept what used to be unacceptable: crowded emergency rooms, no doctors, two million people lined up for blocks around food banks, and rampant crime and homelessness in our streets. We see it every day.
Now even our proud Snowbirds, a symbol of Canadian excellence for generations, are being grounded for years and replaced with inferior aircraft that do not come close to what we have today. In every corner of Canadian life, the message from the government is the same: “Lower your expectations.”
Instead of aspiring to build a better Canada and restoring the fiscal responsibility this country sorely needs, the spring economic update confirms that the Liberals are spending money they do not have and charging the bill to Canadians who can least afford it.
The Prime Minister promised to spend less than Justin Trudeau, but under his leadership, direct program spending has increased 12.4%, and the deficit has doubled from $31 billion to $65 billion. Their own projections in this update show the national debt reaching $1.63 trillion by 2031. Every dollar of that debt comes with a price tag. This year alone, the price is $58.7 billion in interest payments. That is more than the federal government collects on GST and more than it transfers to the provinces through the Canada health transfer. That is $3,400 from every Canadian family: not for hospitals, not for highways, not for any of the people in that job fair line, just for the interest alone. This level of overspending is indefensible, given the windfall of tax revenue the government has collected through higher-than-expected oil prices over the past year.
What did they do with this windfall? They spent 80¢ of every new dollar. They fell short of their own promised savings in operating expenditures by $30 billion. The debt-to-GDP ratio, the government's own preferred measure of fiscal health, will continue rising until 2030. Instead of returning that good fortune to Canadians through lower taxes or applying it against the deficit, the government used it as a licence to spend even more. We see this with the so-called Canada Strong fund. There is another slogan. The Liberal government cannot even manage its own finances, but now it wants to leverage Canadians' own money towards projects underwritten by even more debt.
The key to a sovereign wealth fund is wealth, after all. After 11 years of the Liberal government, Canada has none. Our country is poorer due to Liberal policies that have blocked economic growth, fuelled inflation and increased our national debt to record levels. Now, just as they did with the failed Canada Infrastructure Bank, the Liberals claim that this $25-billion fund will attract investment that it would not otherwise attract. This begs the question that I have asked so many times in this chamber: If this fund is so great and will produce such an amazing return on that investment, why would we stop at $25 billion? Put in $100 billion. Why not put in $250 billion? After all, according to the government, it is just a capital investment. It is basically free. Well, we all know the answer to that, because at some point even the Liberal government has to own up to the fact that incurring massive amounts of debt is not an investment strategy. It is a liability, and $25 billion of it deployed into projects of the government's choosing is not a true wealth fund; it is a gamble, and Canadians are being asked to cover that bet.
This is a recurring theme with the Liberal government's approach to the economy. It is always our people who have to suffer the consequences of this Prime Minister's economic and trade failures, and right now they are struggling in record numbers. New insolvency data shows that over 37,000 Canadians filed for insolvency in the first quarter of 2026, the highest level since the great recession. Our people are carrying $2.6 trillion in household debt, while mortgage delinquency has reached its highest level in five years. With this spring economic update, the Liberals are adding more debt, more costs and more taxes on the backs of Canadians, who are already at the breaking point.
Even worse, all this is taking place while Canada is still without a trade agreement with the United States. The uncertainty, tariffs and job losses that flow from that into auto manufacturing, into agriculture and right across the economy have more of an impact than anything announced in this update. The Liberals are failing on both fronts: They have not lowered the debt, increased investment or unleashed our economy, and they still have not gotten Canadians the trade deal they need.
The Liberals would have us believe that if one does not support their spending, their failures and their misplaced priorities, they somehow do not support this country. It is crazy. Some members in this House may choose to set aside their principles to prop up this government. However, as a member of His Majesty's loyal opposition, my job is not to blindly support the government's agenda. It is to make Canada the best it can be by holding the government to account on behalf of Canadians.
The spring economic update is not a plan to make Canada stronger. It is a plan to make Canadians poorer, and that is just not good enough. I believe in a Canada where hard work is rewarded, where the dream of owning a home is within reach and where the generations that follow us inherit something better than a lifetime of debt with nothing to show for it. That Canada is possible, and Conservatives will fight every day to make it happen.
Bill C-30 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the member talked about reality at the very beginning, and he needs a reality shake. We can look at the holistic approach of this government in the last year, with a new Prime Minister and a new government, and look at the many initiatives that are actually driving and making a positive difference. I will use one example. The member mocks the idea of a sovereignty fund. Other countries around the world actually have sovereignty funds. The Conservatives do not understand what it is.
I have heard the debate, and the Speaker will not allow me enough time to provide the rationale as to why the sovereignty fund, or the Canada strong fund, is a good fund. The Conservative Kool-Aid says no, it is bad, and it is broken. That is all they ever say. They go around Canada, and Canada is—
Scot Davidson Conservative New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON
Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. colleague from Winnipeg North has had too much Kool-Aid today. That is a government that is out of touch. This so-called sovereign wealth fund is financed with debt. The government does not understand the way things work. The Liberals talk about imaginary taxes all the time. They say the industrial carbon tax does not drive up the price of things. That is how upside down the Liberals are.
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Speaker, Canada now has some of the highest household debt and least affordable housing in the G7. Food bank use is at a record high. Seniors are skipping meals. Young families are delaying having children. Working parents are choosing between groceries, rent and medication. However, I have heard the Liberals say over and over today that they are improving affordability and that Canada's economy is doing great.
My question is simple. If life is supposedly getting better, why are so many Canadians feeling like they are falling further behind every single month?
Scot Davidson Conservative New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is right. Canadians are flat broke. I spent time in the riding over these last two weeks. I could not believe the stories people and small business owners were telling me. As an aside, and I have spoken about this a number of times, we have been waiting 10 years for natural gas lines in my riding and for phase three hydro so small businesses can start. People are coming to me, frustrated, asking, “Why are we sending all this money overseas? Why am I on the outside looking in when all I am trying to do is just get ahead?”
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague's point of view. Forcing the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to consider both economic impact and impact on people's health equally will increase food safety risks.
Furthermore, encouraging foreign platforms to enter an open banking system will reduce the restrictions that prevent foreign banks from taking control of our banks.
What does my colleague think about that?
Scot Davidson Conservative New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON
Mr. Speaker, as in my opening, I am always proud to represent the soup and salad bowl of Canada. Again, going back to the Liberal government with the industrial carbon tax, the Liberals sit there and say that the industrial carbon tax does not affect the price of anything and that it is actually good for prices. I go back to what I said about the wealth fund. If raising the industrial carbon tax does not affect anything, why only raise it to $170? They should put it up to $400. It does not affect anything. It is the same with the wealth fund. Why $25 billion? If the returns are so good, why not put $500 billion in it and get it going?
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to agree with my colleague. The sovereign wealth funds of other countries, particularly Norway's, were designed on Peter Lougheed's plan, which was to take oil revenue out of government rents and using it as a set-aside for a rainy day, which is not what the Liberals' fund proposes to do.
I wonder if my hon. colleague has any comments.
Scot Davidson Conservative New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON
Mr. Speaker, we are all concerned about the promises the government makes. It is all pie in the sky. We spent $300 million. We were supposed to have a factory that actually created vaccines for Canadians in Quebec. Where is that factory now? Where is the $300 million? That is what Canadians call waste.
Bill C-30 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Nipissing—Timiskaming Ontario
Liberal
Pauline Rochefort LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State (Rural Development)
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from La Prairie—Atateken.
I rise today to speak to the spring economic statement and to confirm that I will be voting in support of Bill C-30, an act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update that was tabled in the House of Commons on April 28.
There are many important elements within both the bill and the statement, but today I would like to focus on two central themes. First is the proposed Canada Strong fund and what it represents for the people of Nipissing—Timiskaming in providing an opportunity to be all in for Canada. Secondly, I would like to speak to the many ways that Canada is supporting the residents of Nipissing—Timiskaming, demonstrating that Canada is also all in for its citizens. I am glad that today in the House, there are members from my riding.
On that note, I spent the last two weeks in my riding meeting with residents and attending community events and local functions. What I sensed in general was a growing feeling that this is a moment for Canadians to come together. I believe it is much like being part of a team, and I am sure fans of the Montreal Canadiens understand the analogy well, especially today. When the stakes are high, it is not the time to sit back on the bench. It is time to ask ourselves, how can we contribute to the success of the team?
The same is true for Canada today. We may have different views on strategy, but once the game has started, our success depends on our ability to work together toward a common goal. In many ways, the times we are living in now remind me of the period following the Second World War. I was not alive then, but according to history books, Canada was facing the enormous task of rebuilding and strengthening the country. At that time, Canadians were able to directly participate in building the nation through Canada savings bonds.
As part of the spring economic statement, the Prime Minister announced the Canada Strong fund, the country's first national sovereign wealth fund. This proposed fund would allow individual Canadians to co-invest alongside institutional partners in large-scale, nation-building infrastructure projects. While we have discussed it here today, the final design of the fund has not yet been announced, as it will be shaped through consultations that will begin shortly.
However, even at this early stage, the spirit behind the initiative reminds me of the era of Canada savings bonds, established in 1945 under former prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King. For generations, Canada savings bonds provided Canadians with a trusted and accessible way to support the growth and transformation of the economy, while building wealth for themselves and their families. They were promoted not merely as financial instruments but as tools of nation building, fostering a culture of shared economic purpose during a period when millions of Canadians were emerging from uncertainty and insecurity.
One constituent in my riding recently shared with me how much pride his father had. His father worked for a small township in Timiskaming, and he earned a modest income. His son spoke of how his father was proud when he purchased his first Canada savings bond because for him, it meant that he was contributing to Canada, to its growth, to the country he loved and to something that was larger than himself. I can actually relate to that personally because when I started to work, I purchased my own Canada savings bonds. I was in my 20s. I am somewhat embarrassed to say that my motivation was not about savings at that age, but it was about contributing to Canada. It was about supporting my country and feeling connected to something bigger than myself.
Although the program ended almost a decade ago, for almost 70 years it meant Canadians had the opportunity to contribute directly to our country's success. Because of my own experience, and what I continue to hear from residents across Nipissing—Timiskaming, I strongly support both the concept of and the rationale behind the proposed Canada Strong fund.
A strong economy is not built by government and industry alone. It is built when citizens feel connected to the opportunities ahead and confident they have a role to play in shaping the future. The Canada Strong fund is about building Canada together. From energy to infrastructure to mining, the fund will invest across key sectors while delivering market rate returns for Canadians who choose to participate.
I particularly appreciate the Prime Minister's emphasis on making the fund accessible to all Canadians, regardless of their economic situation. In my view, that is important because it strengthens Canadians' connection to their country and to the values that define us.
In many ways, the Canada Strong fund reflects the same spirit that was once behind the Canada savings bonds. As Prime Minister Mackenzie King said, our duty is to give all of our citizens a greater measure of security.
Today, Canada continues to pursue that same goal: to provide Canadians with greater security and greater certainty at a time that is marked by economic and geopolitical uncertainty, as many in the House have mentioned.
I am proud to live in a country that has the backs of its citizens in practical and meaningful ways. Canada is supporting families, workers, seniors, businesses and communities, including the residents of my riding, Nipissing—Timiskaming. While time permits only a few examples, these measures demonstrate how federal investments are making a tangible difference in the lives of the people in my riding. Last week, I was pleased to announce funding through the regional tariff response initiative to support five prominent mining sector companies in my riding as they modernize and expand their operations in the face of unfair and unjust tariffs. These investments will protect jobs and create better-paying jobs throughout our riding.
Through the strategic response fund, we also saw approval for Electra Battery Materials Corporation's $100-million project to produce battery-grade cobalt sulphate in Timiskaming. For our country, domestic cobalt sulphate production will reduce the reliance on imports and strengthen key sectors such as electric vehicles, defence manufacturing, semiconductors and medical technologies. For Nipissing—Timiskaming, that represents 60 direct jobs and, during the construction, 100 skilled trade workers who will be working on the construction site.
Last week, I was pleased to confirm an investment through the Canada-Ontario community housing initiative to support the construction of 60 affordable homes in North Bay. Affordable housing remains one of the most—