Debates of May 5th, 2026

Opposition Motion—Measures to Support the Manufacturing Sector

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have had the privilege over the last couple of months, as chair of the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, of being part of lots of exceptional conversations with industry leaders and experts, who have given us significant guidance and insight. We had a conversation yesterday at the committee in relation to the $1.5 billion that the Minister of Industry announced yesterday.

I am wondering if the parliamentary secretary can comment on the ways in which those investments are going to allow the businesses we are talking about, in reference to this challenge in the House today, deal with the significant challenges they are facing right now.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague and friend from Winnipeg South Centre is inspirational in regard to leadership on economic matters and he is able to encapsulate something really important. We are talking about the Business Development Bank of Canada, along with our regional development agencies. I believe the total is about $1.5 billion. Using those funds and supports shows, in a very tangible way, that the government is there to support, where we can, those vulnerable industries. Obviously, we are talking about the steel, copper and aluminum industries, and we will continue to be there for them. It is the right thing to do for the businesses. It is the right thing to do for the workers.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a fairly simple question for the parliamentary secretary. We are here in good faith. The Bloc Québécois always comes forward with proposals. We are not an opposition party that opposes everything just for the sake of opposing it. We come forward with proposals.

One of the proposals we put forward—which, incidentally, comes from several stakeholders currently affected by the tariffs—is a wage subsidy program designed for businesses impacted by the tariffs. This would help retain jobs and preserve expertise. It would ease the transition until an agreement is reached with the Americans.

On this specific point, does my colleague support the Bloc Québécois's proposal to implement such a wage subsidy? If he does not support this proposal, I would like him to explain why.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think the government has clearly demonstrated an interest in supporting the workers. That is one of the reasons why we developed the work-sharing program.

With respect to other ways we can support workers, I am sure the department has been looking at whatever options might be there. I do not have the details with me right now, but I am sure they would be viable and ultimately assist the industry.

I would remind the member that I believe there is a work-sharing program. I do not know the exact design of it.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to focus a bit here on the forestry industry, which is not talked about a lot. Obviously, we have lost thousands of jobs in that sector.

The government talked about expanding opportunities in trade as something we definitely need to do. The Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay riding that I represent has six border crossings we depend on and have used historically for trade with the United States. With respect to the industries that are dependent on that cross-border trade, like the forest industry, what does the member think about the very little time spent in negotiations for this sector?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is one of the reasons why this whole buy Canada program is absolutely essential and would benefit our lumber industry as a whole. When I think of our lumber industry, most people do not realize the magnitude of it, not only the direct jobs but the many indirect jobs and how we put that all together, everything from the person cutting down a tree to the person planting a tree, all the way to those individuals who are manufacturing products and building components whether for a house or a couch. That industry is absolutely vital. It is one of the reasons I would amplify the importance of things like major projects, programs that promote modular homes and build Canada Homes. They are the types of programs that make a difference and will be there hopefully to protect our—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know whether my colleague agrees with me.

I would say that one of the strengths of our government's strategy is that we are truly presenting a comprehensive plan. We are helping businesses that have immediate needs. We are diversifying our markets abroad. We are building a stronger domestic market, particularly through strategic infrastructure investments and our “buy Canadian” policy.

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this strategy. Does he agree with me that one of its strengths is its coherence and the fact that it includes multiple components—both short-term measures for businesses that need help right now and long-term measures to strengthen our economy?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is truly a holistic approach with respect to dealing with Canada's economy and our very social fabric. If we continue to move forward, as we have been, at the end of the day I believe we will be able to continue to say that Canada is the best country in the world to call home.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I should mention that I will be sharing my time with the member for Shefford.

One year ago, the government was elected on a single, simple promise: to fix the tariff crisis. We all remember the departure of former prime minister Trudeau and the arrival of the new Prime Minister, who was portrayed as the man who would save us from the Trump administration, as a businessman who could hold his own against the most formidable negotiators. One year on, however, it is clear that the promise has not been fulfilled.

Where are the results? Again, the members of this government and the Prime Minister were elected one year ago, almost to the day, purely on the strength of a promise to end the tariff crisis. In April 2025, the Prime Minister promised that the crisis would end in June. Then he pushed it back to July. Then he pushed it back to September. Now a year has passed and not only is the tariff war still going, but it has escalated thanks to Mr. Trump's recent executive orders.

Worse still, we were presented with one of the most absurd ideas ever last week: Borrow $25 million on Quebeckers' collective credit card and create a supposedly sovereign fund that is neither sovereign nor independent. That speaks volumes about the government's long-term vision. Right now, it raises the question of whether we are dealing with pure improvisation.

The icing on the cake is that on April 6, the Trump administration issued a new executive order. There is now a flat 25% tariff on the full value of the export if the percentage of Canadian steel, aluminum or copper in the product exceeds 15% of the total composition. As a result, many products protected by CUSMA that were not taxed before are being taxed today. When we asked the Prime Minister about this issue—when my leader asked about it, I was right beside him—we realized that he did not even know about it. Amazing. He did not even know about an executive order signed two weeks earlier.

According to a study by Desjardins, this new 25% tariff applies to one-quarter of exports to the U.S. It is significant. There are exemptions, like for the aerospace sector and products that contain American steel or aluminum, but, for the most part, this new American surtax is hitting our industries much harder than previous ones. The cumulative effect is very clear. It is the added value of our economy that is being taxed—skilled trades, engineering and local processing. Washington is no longer taxing our exports; it is taxing what we are building. That is unprecedented.

The people had put so much faith in this Prime Minister and his government to put an end to the tariff war, but the result, as I said earlier, has been an escalation of that war.

What are we doing in the meantime? The Bloc Québécois proposed a series of measures when the so-called economic update was being drafted. The government did not use a single one of them. These measures would have been easy to implement, would have barely cost anything and would have directly helped the people most impacted by the tariff crisis in Quebec: workers and SMEs. Today, we are back at it again for the sake of our workers and businesses, who are sick of waiting for this government.

After months of waiting, on May 4, the government finally announced new measures: $1 billion in loans and $500 million for economic development agencies. It is worth mentioning something here, because the government does not seem to realize that it is missing the mark. Although I do want to acknowledge that these agencies are very useful, they do not address the concerns of businesses that are already in debt. The problem is that with this announcement, the government is helping businesses that will be affected in the future, not the ones already being affected by the crisis. We estimate that Quebec businesses alone have lost about $8 billion in one year. The $1.5‑billion measure announced by the government is woefully inadequate.

I would remind the House that ahead of the economic update, the Bloc Québécois proposed numerous measures to support businesses. For the benefit of my Liberal friends, I will outline some of the seven measures proposed by the Bloc Québécois to support workers and businesses severely impacted by the tariff crisis.

The first of our demands is the one that resonates most with the public. It is to implement a wage subsidy program modelled after the one rolled out during the pandemic to prevent layoffs, maintain employment relationships, and protect the expertise within businesses during the tariff crisis.

The Bloc Québécois's second proposal is to impose safeguard tariffs to protect the hardest-hit sectors, including the softwood lumber, aluminum and steel industries, from cheap imports. These tariffs would apply to products from the United States or any other source that resorts to harmful trade practices, such as dumping, as my colleagues mentioned earlier, or the misrepresentation of Canadian origin.

We proposed another measure, and that is buying back a portion of the countervailing and anti-dumping duties that softwood lumber manufacturers pay when they export to the United States. We proposed this measure a long time ago. It was also proposed by the industry and supported by the various unions representing workers in this industry.

We could also stimulate the secondary and tertiary processing of our resources. The Bloc Québécois always aligns its proposals with industry demands. AluQuébec, the secretariat of Quebec's aluminum industry cluster, is calling on governments to implement an urgent response on three fronts: subsidies or interest-free loans, preferential procurement rules for Quebec, and anti-dumping quotas or duties on imports. The CEO, Charlotte Laramée, says that the aluminum processing sector deserves the same treatment as the steel sector, and that includes immediate protection against unfair competition.

For their part, steelworkers and the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec, or FCCQ, are taking the same stance. The CEO of the FCCQ, Véronique Proulx, sent a clear message when she said, and I quote: “For businesses whose survival is currently in jeopardy, this is not enough. They need to have the cash flow necessary to maintain their day-to-day operations, not take on more debt or make investments that will only benefit them in the medium to long term”.

In the latest economic update, however, the government did not include any targeted measures for businesses affected by Donald Trump's illegal tariffs. On the contrary, the Liberals patted themselves on the back for taking in more than $10.1 billion in tariffs in 2025‑26 and redistributing $5.7 billion. Wow. That means that $4.4 billion in countertariff revenue is sitting idle in Ottawa's coffers while SMEs are going out of business. The Liberals are celebrating that. The government clearly has the tools, but as my colleague from Joliette—Manawan said earlier, it does not have the will. Real solutions do exist, though.

Another proposal that the Bloc Québécois made was a wage subsidy program for businesses affected by the tariffs. We calculate that the government could allocate $5.5 billion for such a measure. This is an expediture that could easily be offset by cutting back on the numerous subsidies going to oil and gas companies, since they are making record profits anyway thanks to rising global oil prices. Their costs are not going up, so these multinational corporations are pocketing the difference.

Not providing wage subsidies in response to the ongoing tariff war is tantamount to condoning the inevitable wave of layoffs, letting decades of expertise go to waste, and permanently crippling whole industrial clusters in Quebec and Canada.

The Bloc Québécois's request today is very simple. The revenue generated by our retaliatory tariffs must be redistributed, as a priority, to the workers and businesses that are bearing the brunt of these measures. It must not be diluted in centralizing programs that encroach on Quebec's areas of jurisdiction or subsidize fossil fuels. For every dollar collected on the targeted imports, a significant portion must be used to maintain wages here, keep factories open, and keep our regions alive.

What needs to be made clear today is that the real urgency is not to maximize returns on a fund that will bet on oil and gas. The real urgency lies with our workers, our small and medium-sized businesses, and our regions, which are bearing the brunt of a trade crisis triggered by Donald Trump's decisions. With just a fraction of those $25 billion, we could take action now. We could set up a special fund to immediately support businesses hit by tariffs, protect jobs, support retraining and give our small and medium-sized businesses the means to weather the storm. That is what a responsible response looks like. That is what rising to the challenge look like.

Instead, the government seems to be taking a different path. Either it does not believe in its ability to negotiate an agreement that will put an end to these unfair tariffs, or it has already accepted that our economy must slowly adapt to a new reality where our traditional markets and our SMEs—which form the economic fabric of Quebec and keep it afloat—no longer matter to the government. We need answers now. We need a government that chooses to defend jobs, support businesses and invest in the future. Ultimately, the question is simple: Will the government choose to wait, or will it choose to act?

We choose to act. We are doing it for our workers, for our SMEs, for our businesses, for Quebec and for our regions. Everything the Bloc Québécois does is done out of love for Quebec.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. As I listen to him and read the motion, I see our government's overall direction and the comprehensive approach we have taken on economic issues, from diversifying our international partnerships and providing immediate relief measures, such as the funds we just announced this week, to strengthening the domestic market and boosting demand.

Would my colleague from the Bloc Québécois agree that the spirit of the motion, particularly where it refers to helping businesses, is somewhat in line with the approach our government has been taking over the past year? That is what I gather from listening to him.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I understand my colleague's question about the government's approach, but it is all theoretical and only exists on paper. We are not seeing results in real life. If my colleague visits my riding and sits down in the offices of Petit Paris, Resolute-Domtar or Arbec for a chat, he will find out that this situation is not working for them.

We support the idea of helping our businesses, of course, because no one is against good things. However, the Bloc is offering clear proposals that would improve the situation and that are largely based on requests made by stakeholders directly affected by the tariffs. I hope the Liberal government will take the hand we are holding out today.

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Prime Minister touts himself as the master negotiator, yet he flip-flops on his position on U.S. trade like a magician distracting with illusions while nothing actually happens. Last year, the Prime Minister said “elbows up” to Washington. Months later, he put his elbows down and said, “Who cares?” about the talks. Fast-forward to this year, and the Liberal Prime Minister said that U.S. integration is subordination. A quick few months later he changed course and said that we are stronger together with the U.S.

Here is the reality: Steel tariffs have doubled, lumber tariffs have tripled and manufacturing tariffs are hitting our workers here at home, yet after all the Liberal rhetoric and illusions, there is still no trade deal after more than a year. There is still no timeline and no plan.

At what point will the Liberals stop blaming tariffs for Canada's economic decline and start admitting that it is their failure to get a deal done and to reduce even a single tariff that is sending Canadians to food banks by the millions?

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly why we moved today's motion. We all know the government promised to end the tariff war and reach an agreement with the United States quickly. That was a year ago. Unfortunately, it is not happening, and we cannot pretend that it will happen anytime soon.

That is exactly why we put this proposal forward today. We hope all members of the House will agree with the wording of the motion. I cannot imagine anyone—Conservative, Liberal or independent—voting against this motion. It is reasonable, it is based on stakeholder proposals and it will have an immediate and direct impact on the current crisis. It will save jobs, save businesses large and small, and keep Quebec's regions alive.

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate my colleague for his excellent speech.

What SMEs told us in committee, during an emergency study of this matter, is that they need help, that the 25% tariffs are a disaster, but that the loans have to stop. They are already carrying too much debt.

That is why we are proposing a wage subsidy, which has the advantage of maintaining the employment relationship. These businesses often employ welders, machinists and operators, all trades with a severe worker shortage. Without a wage subsidy, companies may have to lay them off. Their EI benefits would amount to about as much as a wage subsidy. However, when the time comes to rehire them, they might be harder to get back.

Can my colleague explain this to us some more and try to convince the government about how important this measure is?

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in my view, it is essential that the government agree to our request, which is not only a Bloc Québécois request, but also what many SMEs and various industrial and economic sectors have been calling for.

What is interesting about this measure is that it does not call for any new mechanisms to be developed. They were already developed during the pandemic. In fact, one of the reasons put forward for doing so during the pandemic was to maintain these employment relationships so that businesses would not lose their employees in the midst of a labour shortage in occupations that are difficult to fill, frankly. It is hard to find welders, machinists, mechanics and electrical engineers, for example.

There is a real need to put this in place quickly. I hope the government is listening to what we are doing. This is not at all political. It is truly a proposal for the benefit of our businesses and our workers. I am convinced that, if the government is serious, it will agree to our request and implement this quickly.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on today's important Bloc Québécois motion on the U.S. tariffs and the impact on businesses and workers. They absolutely need our support in this time of uncertainty. I welcome this motion, and I am very pleased to speak to it.

Since April 6, Quebec has been hit hard by a major economic shock. Donald Trump made a decision to impose new tariffs, which come as a direct attack on our businesses. These are not abstract numbers. Workers, SMEs and entire regions are affected.

I would like to commend our whistle-blower, the member for Joliette—Manawan, who alerted us through his amazing work on the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology. I thank him for notifying us and for keeping an eye out on behalf of Quebec businesses.

What we are currently facing is no mere trade dispute. It is an economic crisis that threatens the very fabric of our industry. The city of Valcourt, in my riding of Shefford, is a symbol of Quebec industry, of Quebec entrepreneurship, where a small garage grew into today's Bombardier. As the member for Shefford, I am well aware of Quebec's unique industrial fabric and the entrepreneurship developed over the years that now sets us apart.

What happened on April 6 is a total game-changer. Since then, a 25% tariff has been applied to the total value of products containing over 15% steel, aluminum or copper. As a result, products that were once exempt are now being taxed. This means that a lot more companies are now being affected.

Here are a few key facts: 24% of Quebec's exports to the U.S. are now targeted, and the average effective tariff rate has climbed from 5.7% to 9.6%. Now, Washington is not just taxing metal, but also Quebec's value added, know-how and labour.

The economic impact is already very real and the consequences are already being felt in Quebec: 9,700 jobs have been lost in the manufacturing sector. Other data indicate that there is a 5.1% decline in employment in some sectors and 441,000 manufacturing workers are at risk. In the aluminum sector, 65% of SMEs are reporting a drop in sales and 47% are anticipating layoffs. Nearly one in three businesses are worried about their survival. This is not a future risk; it is a full-fledged crisis.

This has a real impact on businesses. Some businesses are experiencing very immediate consequences, such as cancelled orders, loss of competitiveness and sudden cost increases. For example, a $30,000 part can generate $7,500 in tariffs. Some businesses are losing between 30% and 50% of their sales in the span of just a few weeks.U.S. buyers are turning to local suppliers to avoid risk.

This is a reality throughout Quebec, including in the highly entrepreneurial and industrial city of Granby, in my riding of Shefford. It is home to many small and medium-sized manufacturers. I want to acknowledge the work of Granby Industriel and the incredible Granby industrial park. From Rougemont to Racine, businesses allow the beautiful riding of Shefford to thrive. However, we have to recognize that we are dependent on exports to the United States.

It took media coverage about one case for us to wake up. It was the case of BRP, whose share price plummeted. Even without a specific high-profile case, the signals are still clear: loss of contracts, delayed projects and growing economic uncertainty. Businesses have to adapt, but many fear that they will have to reduce their staff. In Granby and elsewhere, businesses no longer know whether to invest or simply survive. This is a reality they are experiencing.

The problem is the government's response, which is inadequate—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

The notes the member is using are stapled together, I believe. When she turns the pages, they hit the microphone. It is causing problems for the interpreters, because it makes a very loud noise.

I invite the member for Shefford to continue while taking care to avoid that.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I sincerely apologize to the interpreters. I never turn the pages like that, but I forgot. They will be going in another direction.

The problem is the government's inadequate response. The government was slow to react, and the economic update initially contained no measures tailored to the crisis. While $10.1 billion was collected in tariffs, only $5.7 billion is being redistributed. This leaves $4.4 billion unused while businesses are struggling, and the announced measures rely primarily on loans.

They are proposing $1 billion through the Business Development Bank of Canada and $500 million through regional agencies. This is good, but the problem, as my colleague from Joliette—Manawan said and as he heard in committee, is that businesses are already over-indebted. He heard this from representatives of economic organizations in Quebec, who raised this point.

That will not solve the problem, because the fundamental issue is not that businesses lack access to credit; it is that they are already in debt, as I said. However, they are cash-strapped and unable to continue their operations during this period of uncertainty, so we do need to offer loans to businesses that are experiencing revenue losses. However, if we focus solely on that solution, it amounts to increasing their debt burden, so we are not coming out ahead.

The Bloc Québécois is instead proposing concrete measures that are tailored to the situation. We keep coming back to our first idea: the wage subsidy. This solution is based on the model used during the pandemic, which worked well. The advantage is that it helps maintain employment relationships and prevents mass layoffs. By protecting the employment relationship, this measure helps to retain expertise and avoid higher social costs. That is important.

There is also the idea of buying local. We suggest introducing a local procurement policy to support local processing and economic self-sufficiency. This morning, I met with representatives from companies such as Lassonde, which sells beverages. This morning, these food processing companies emphasized that there is no policy, no commitment. Government must lead by example. Much of it depends on institutional frameworks, but we must put this policy in place. It was part of the Bloc's proposals during the last election campaign, a year ago. We wanted Canada to pass a sort of “Buy Canadian Act” to prioritize buying local.

We also want to support businesses directly by prioritizing grants over loans and addressing their short-term cash flow needs. We are also proposing another solution: a one-stop shop for SMEs to simplify access to programs, reduce the administrative burden and provide clear, centralized support.

As the employment and labour critic, I would also add that employment insurance reform is necessary and of utmost importance to ensuring support for those who, despite everything, will lose their jobs during this crisis. Our social safety net must be adjusted to account for 2026 conditions. The Bloc Québécois believes employment insurance reform is crucial, and we will continue to push for it.

The economic risk of doing nothing is immense. Quebec will lose an estimated $8 billion per year. Potential consequences include plant closures, brain drain and long-term regional decline. When a business closes, the jobs and expertise do not necessarily come back, and that is deeply tragic. Sometimes these things are lost forever.

In conclusion, Quebec is particularly vulnerable because its economy is centred on manufacturing and exports. Its economic model is based on SMEs and very small businesses. This context calls for swift, targeted, meaningful action. It is vital to support businesses, protect workers and stabilize the regions. This is so important. I would remind the House that our ridings are home to some incredible family businesses, and we want them to stay in businesses.

Every dollar of countertariff revenue should be reinvested directly to support the people grappling with the consequences of the tariff war. That was mentioned earlier by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean. Inaction and inappropriate measures could have a lasting effect on our economy. It is time to take rigorous, responsible and effective action, as the Bloc Québécois has always done for the sake of Quebec's diversified business and economic sector.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my opening comments on the opposition motion, I actually do appreciate the debate that is happening today with regard to such a very important issue.

All government members are very much concerned about the tariff issue. I would not want those who might be following the debate to be under the impression that the government has not been taking actions to date. Since the last election, a year ago, we have had a very aggressive and proactive Prime Minister and government looking at ways in which we can support those vulnerable industries.

What happened on April 6 is not a good thing. We all agree on that. I think this aspect would be unanimously supported. We will continue to support our workers and our small businesses. It is more so—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I must interrupt the parliamentary secretary to give the member a chance to reply.

The hon. member for Shefford.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would respond to my colleague by asking him a question. Did this government really act swiftly to protect the lumber industry? Did it adopt a real aerospace policy? He should be aware that the lumber and aerospace industries and other Quebec-specific sectors tend to be neglected in negotiations and during these troubled times. The government was quicker to help Ontario's auto industry than to support Quebec-specific sectors.

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, while Mexico is already at the negotiating table with the United States, Canada has not held serious negotiations for months now.

The Liberal Prime Minister likes to tout himself as a serious person, but Canadians are starting to see that there is nothing serious about his approach on trade with the U.S. First, he says our relationship with the U.S. is ruptured and then it is a mutual success. He twists into a pretzel and says our historical ties with the U.S. have been a vulnerability, but now we are “stronger together” with the U.S.

Behind all of the illusions and Liberal rhetoric, the reality is that 2.6 million Canadian jobs depend on resolving these tariffs. That means millions of paycheques, mortgages and rent payments and millions of families putting food on the table.

Why do you think the Liberal Prime Minister has allowed Canada to be sidelined and allowed Canadians to fall further behind while other countries move ahead?

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Before I recognize the member, I want to remind members to speak through the Chair when using “you” and not to speak directly to members.

The hon. member for Shefford.