Debates of May 29th, 2026

Regina International Airport

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition on behalf of concerned workers and business owners at the Regina International Airport.

The signatories of the petition are concerned about the Liberals' proposed official languages administrative monetary penalties regulations and their application to businesses operating at airports. Smaller regional airports, such as Regina, do not have easy access to a fluently bilingual labour force, and as a result, it is not practical to expect every restaurant, souvenir shop and car rental business on the airport's property to offer services in French. They fear that penalties as high as $25,000 per infraction could drive them out of business. Their solution is to simply exclude from the regulations any airport with fewer than four million passengers annually.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to present this petition today in the House of Commons.

Red Lake

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora—Kiiwetinoong, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition today on behalf of over 1,000 people who are urging the government to support the proposed REACH facility in Red Lake. The petitioners note that the current Cochenour Arena is one of the oldest in northern Ontario, and a new facility would provide a modern, expanded space for recreation. The petitioners also note that the facility could serve as an evacuation centre for northern communities frequently displaced by wildfires. Lastly, Red Lake has submitted numerous funding applications but has not received the necessary approvals.

I am proud to stand with the good people of Red Lake.

National Gallery of Canada

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a true honour, as always, to stand in this place, particularly with the petition I am presenting today, which concerns one of my constituents. I know I am just to present the petition, so with a tiny bit of latitude I would like to say that Robert Bateman's birthday was last week. He is one of Canada's most extraordinary wildlife artists.

The petitioners from Saanich—Gulf Islands are asking that the government speak to the National Gallery of Canada. Obviously, the National Gallery is independently run, and the petitioners know this, but they point out the shocking reality that even though its mandate is to showcase artists who contribute significantly to Canadian culture and identity, Mr. Robert Bateman's work has never been exhibited there. Therefore, the petitioners call on the government to urge the National Gallery of Canada to redress this and hold an exhibition for Canadians on the lifetime work of Robert Bateman.

Prime Minister of Canada

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today from my seat in the House of Commons to present e-petition 7359.

The petitioners were alarmed by recent reporting that noted a concerning number of absences by the Prime Minister during question period, and they sponsored this petition, which over 2,100 Canadians have signed, calling on him to attend question period on a weekly basis and to wholly and truthfully answer questions from members of Parliament during those sessions, including on luxury items consumed.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I have the deepest respect for the petitions that are brought forward. I just would not want to see something taking place that cannot be done directly.

If, in fact, it is part of the Conservative agenda to introduce petitions of this nature, I do not believe it would be appropriate. I say this more as a warning. This is the first time I have heard that petition. We hope not to hear its constant repetition, because it refers to a member's absence or presence inside the chamber.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I thank the parliamentary secretary. Standing Order 15 covers whether one can or cannot make reference, at the present moment and during sitting days, to the presence or absence of members, because members have House business and parliamentary business to conduct outside of the chamber. That has always been interpreted to mean that during a sitting day, one cannot make reference to the presence or absence of a member.

The petition was certified by the member and by the clerks. This is a petition presented by the people of Canada in her riding who have signed it. Also, it makes past-tense references. The member did not make reference to today's sitting or to the present moment either.

Members are allowed to table those petitions as long as they stick directly to the text of the petition, which I understand is what she did. I do not find that a rule has been broken here.

The parliamentary secretary knows how much I love the Standing Orders, especially Standing Orders 15, 18 and 10.

Human Rights in China

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Prime Minister will be meeting the foreign minister of China today. I appreciate the opportunity to present a petition that highlights a number of concerns of Canadians that he might want to take up in the context of that meeting.

The petitioners note that credible reports have documented the use of forced labour in China, particularly involving Uyghurs and other persecuted minorities, and that goods produced using forced labour risk entering Canadian supply chains, undermining ethical trade and human rights. Canadian allies, including the United States, have taken stronger measures to combat forced labour and protect supply chains. The petitioners also note that foreign interference has targeted cultural and artistic expression in Canada, including performances such as Shen Yun, and that Canadian citizens, including Huseyin Celil, remain unjustly detained abroad, while other individuals, such as Jimmy Lai, are imprisoned for exercising fundamental freedoms. They note that Canada has a responsibility to defend human rights, uphold the rule of law and protect its sovereignty.

Petitioners want to see the House and the government formally recognize and address the use of forced labour in China; strengthen co-operation with allies, including the United States, to eliminate forced labour from Canadian supply chains; take action to oppose and prevent foreign interference targeting artistic and cultural performances in Canada; advocate for the immediate release of Canadian citizens, including Huseyin Celil, who are unjustly detained abroad; and advocate for the release of individuals unjustly imprisoned for defending fundamental freedoms, including Jimmy Lai.

Parental Benefits

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Next, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition in support of families dealing with bereavement and loss who want to see reforms to the employment insurance system that allow for the continuation of certain benefits with as little red tape as possible in the process. Later today, we are going to be debating a private member's bill that goes partway there. The petitioners are highlighting further action that is required.

They note that if a person on parental leave passes away, their family immediately loses access to benefits that they have paid into. A family that pays into that system should not lose benefits they paid for, especially when they need them most. Compounding grief with the abrupt end of benefits creates financial distress at a time when families are already dealing with the unimaginable. Petitioners note that the human resources committee has recently agreed to study this issue and has requested costing information on a proposal to protect these benefits if the parent on leave passes away.

Petitioners want to see the government reform the EI system to support all grieving families by preserving access to parental leave if the parent on leave passes away.

Medical Assistance in Dying

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I am tabling a petition in support of Bill C-260, the care not coercion act, on which I understand people can find more information by visiting www.carenotcoercion.ca. This is an excellent private member's bill tabled by a member of Parliament I know well.

Petitioners note that many reports, including media stories and evidence received by parliamentary committees, indicate a serious problem of veterans, people with disabilities, seniors and those living in poverty being offered euthanasia, or facilitated death, by bureaucrats while trying to access completely unrelated public services. People are seeking access to services from the government or other agencies and are having those people in positions of authority or trust tell them, “Well, instead of accessing these services, how about you die instead?” This is ghoulish and horrifying, but it is very real in this country. The CEO of Inclusion Canada, Krista Carr, has testified before the finance committee that she hears weekly complaints from people with disabilities who have had facilitated death proposed to them when they were trying to access other services.

There is a wide gap between what members of Parliament, in many cases, perceive on these issues and the lived experience of people with disabilities. Petitioners would encourage members of Parliament to listen to those concerns. Petitioners note that Bill C-260, the care not coercion act preventing coercion of persons not seeking medical assistance in dying, would prevent instances of coercion in which a bureaucrat offers medically facilitated death to those who are not asking for it.

Petitioners call on the Government of Canada to support Bill C-260, the care not coercion act; to find more information at carenotcoercion.ca; and to support additional action to combat the growing problem of MAID coercion.

Questions Passed as Orders for Return

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

Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 1037, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1041, 1042, 1043, 1044, 1045, 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054 and 1055 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time, please.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

It it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

[For text of questions and responses, see Written Questions website]

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-31, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to conclude my remarks. I was speaking about not having a national security strategy for Canada to back up the government's Defence Investment Agency and defence industrial strategy. None of this will work without this key foundation. A procurement architecture cannot be designed for a mission that has never been defined or for threats that have not been assessed. We cannot build an agency to deliver capability to our armed forces when we have not decided what capability Canada actually needs.

The Minister of National Defence admitted to me in testimony at committee that no consideration of threat assessments, pre-kinetic warfare, grey zone warfare, cognitive operations or PSYOPS is in the defence investment strategy. How could there be? That would require a foundational national security strategy, a strategy the government does not have.

Simply put, the government has put the cart before the horse, and Canadians in uniform will pay the price. Indeed, all of Canada will pay the price. This is the exact opposite of creating a self-reliant and sovereign country.

The fancy speeches, the hollow announcements and the promises are all illusions. The reality is that it seems as if the Prime Minister is more focused on building his own defence industry oligarchy.

As Conservatives, we have always stood proudly with the women and men who serve in uniform. We ask them to do dangerous things. We ask them to stand between Canadians and harm. We send them to protect our sovereignty, to serve our allies and to represent our country at its best. The very least we owe them is the right equipment, honestly procured without corruption, without patronage and without a $1-billion slush fund that answers to no one.

Vancouver Island is home to both CFB Comox and CFB Esquimalt. The families there are watching, the veterans there are watching and the serving members are watching. They are all starting to see behind the curtain of illusion, and the illusion is starting to crumble.

We will oppose division 16 of this bill, not because we oppose defence investment, but because we refuse to accept the illusion of it in place of reality. Canada deserves better. Our armed forces deserve better. The people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, who live alongside—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

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

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe the member can actually make those statements and keep a straight face. Under the Conservative Party, they actually had just below 1% of GDP going to Canada's military.

The current Prime Minister, elected just over a year ago, made a commitment to bring it up to 2% of Canada's GDP. We accomplished that months after. Before the end of last year, we achieved the 2%. We provided support, financial pay and so forth, investing in the military and building a military industry. That is what this government has done.

What did the Conservative government do? It did zip, nothing. In fact, it closed veterans offices. Imagine what—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

The hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite's question was ill-informed. The 2% NATO spending that the government constantly boasts about is truly an illusion. Money was shuffled. The Coast Guard, which is not operationally deployable, was accounted for, and that is not within the NATO regulations.

In fact, I would like to draw the member opposite's attention to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the gold and global standard for identifying government and NATO spending, which said that the discrepancy was 0.4%. In other words, Canada has only actually spent, by this gold standard assessment, 1.6%. This is another Liberal illusion, and Canadians need to see that reality. Of note, I will add that Canada was the only country mentioned with such a large discrepancy in our alleged 2% spending. It is shameful.

[Burton Bailey, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his service.

Two days ago, to much fanfare at CANSEC, the Prime Minister announced a deal to purchase military aircraft from Saab, which I believe is an affiliate company of Brookfield.

Have they actually signed a deal, or is it another Liberal illusion?

[Jeff Kibble, Conservative, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, indeed, there was much fanfare and much excitement from industry as this amazing deal was supposedly announced. This is more illusion, as I alluded to throughout my speech. The Prime Minister of Oz made this great announcement. Let me hold back the curtain and show the reality, right from Saab's press release. On its web page, Saab stated, “Canada has announced that they will enter into detailed discussions and formal negotiations with Saab [to be potentially] the preferred supplier of Canada’s future.... Saab has not signed a contract nor received an order.”

That is the reality. Across the way is the illusion, and Canadians are seeing through it.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would reinforce where the Conservative Party is probably at its weakest. The member tried to paint a picture that is just not true. At the end of the day, I would compare our investments in the Canadian Forces to the Conservatives' when his leader was a member of government for 10 years. They actually dipped just below 1% of Canada's GDP. It is truly amazing that the member would try to give this false impression, as if the Conservatives actually supported the Canadian Forces, when in fact they cut nine offices from Veterans Affairs. It is delusional that the member is able to make the statements that he has.

Why does he not stick straight to the facts?