Debates of May 6th, 2026

Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on a question asked by my colleague across the aisle regarding relations with the United States.

I would like my colleague to talk about what our country can do to set a good example in terms of health care systems. What kind of example can we set for the United States?

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, despite all of our challenges, our health care system in Canada is a great moral victory. The notion that no Canadian should ever be bankrupted by medical costs is a fundamental premise that is held up by all sides of the political spectrum. I believe that is a lesson Canada can continue to teach the world, and one we must continue to heed ourselves in all of the great work ahead.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, first I want to congratulate my colleague on her election. She has been a strong proponent of a universal public pharmacare plan. She has long advocated and argued that a national single-payer pharmacare program would actually save money, but now she represents a riding in a province that does not have a pharmacare deal.

Can New Democrats, the people of Ontario and the people of her riding count on her to be a champion, to force her government to get to the table with Ontario and deliver on the promise of a national pharmacare plan so those people in Ontario can actually get access to it?

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleague across the way as well. Absolutely, I think it will be critically important for the Government of Ontario to sit down with the Government of Canada to talk about the future of pharmacare. There is no universe in which that conversation can happen without both parties at the table.

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

Mr. Speaker, I must start with congratulating the new member for University—Rosedale. I have long admired her advocacy for our public health care system when going down to Washington.

This may be a bit of a tough question. Does she agree with the Canadian Medical Association that the climate crisis is the single biggest public health threat of the 21st century? Can she help us get it back on track, with her government at the moment going slow?

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Indeed, Mr. Speaker, it is the World Health Organization itself that has deemed climate change to be the number one threat to health all over the world. It is not just a problem in Canada, as the member knows well. Certainly, it is absolutely a priority of this government and must continue to be a priority for all of us to make sure we are taking care of those essential determinants of health, including the climate.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Riding Mountain.

On April 28, the Minister of Finance proudly tabled his economic update. He talked about “Canada Strong”. He repeats that line every week in the House. The 167‑page update includes billions of dollars in spending, $25 billion for a sovereign debt fund, strategies, programs and announcements on top of announcements. In Parliament, the government was talking about ambition.

Meanwhile, on April 28, people in Baie‑Saint‑Paul, Saint‑Hilarion, Beaupré, Boischatel, L'Isle‑aux‑Coudres, Île d'Orléans and in Montmorency—Charlevoix were going about their daily lives. Families were worried about their grocery bills. Young couples were holding off on buying their first home. Seniors were counting down the days until their next pension cheque. Workers were wondering how they were going to be able to pay their mortgage at the end of the month.

These are the two realities that we are facing here in Canada in 2026. In Ottawa, the government talks to us about billions of dollars; in Quebec, however, people talk to us about dollars. I am rising today to make a connection between these two realities. To hear the Liberals talk in the House, it seems like all is well, yet Canadians know the truth, because they live with it daily. They go to the grocery store and see that things are more expensive. They go to the gas station and gas seems a lot more expensive too. When the time comes to pay their rent, mortgage or credit card, they see that something is wrong.

I would like to talk about credit card budgets. The government talks about discipline, caution and responsibility, but let us look at the facts through the eyes of an an impartial third party. Claude Lavoie is not a Conservative. He was director-general of economic studies at Finance Canada. He said this:

It's not that the GDP is doing better. It's more that we took in more revenue [including from gas taxes, because gas is expensive, so it brings in more money] and spent a little less by deferring certain expenses.

In other words, the programs that were announced were not delivered, the money was not spent and people were taxed more. Now, the government is telling us that public finances have been carefully managed and that it has kept its promises. No, the government did not keep its promises at all. Not only did it not spend the money, but it imposed more taxes. It is also important to note that the Liberals are projecting an average deficit of $55 billion over five years. Things are not going well when it comes to taxation.

The Conservatives are calling this a credit card budget. Basically, the government is paying the bills with the national credit card. Then, Canadians are forced to pay their bills with their own personal credit cards. That is why everything costs more. It is because when the Liberals spend without any limit, prices, interest rates and mortgages all go up and families get poorer.

Today, the interest on the debt costs more than all of the health transfers to all the provinces. We were talking about health transfers. The interest on the debt costs more than all of that. Imagine. Every dollar people spend on federal taxes when they make a purchase goes toward paying bankers and bondholders. It does not go toward paying doctors and nurses, let alone supporting patients. Meanwhile, Canadians are skipping meals.

There are parents who work full time. Some even work overtime, like Kevin, who called me this week to talk about his situation. He even shared his story with QUB Radio through tears. That is the reality for hard-working citizens who can no longer make ends meet. It is not that these people are not putting in the resources, the work or the effort. It is that they simply can no longer survive under Liberal rule, which takes everything from them. There are seniors living on $2,000 a month. How is anyone supposed to get by on $2,000 a month? The Prime Minister told us that affordability is the best it has ever been, but people do not live in press releases. They live in the real world.

I would like to discuss something else that was announced: the sovereign debt fund. Despite inflation and the cost of living crisis, the government found a way to borrow $25 billion to create a gimmicky sovereign debt fund. The government talks about Norway and says that it will follow the Norwegians' approach. It cannot be serious. Norway built its sovereign wealth fund by developing its resources and became wealthy by selling these resources. Norway's sovereign wealth fund is worth $3.5 trillion Canadian. It achieved this by developing its resources, not by going into debt and borrowing money.

What is the Canadian government doing? Instead of using surpluses, it is taking on more debt to create the illusion of a sovereign wealth fund when that is not what it actually is. Basically, it is as if our neighbour boasted about opening up a savings account and depositing money into it but failed to mention that he used his credit card for the deposit. Ultimately, it is not a terrible idea, although what is most concerning is that the government refuses to even say how much this fund is going to cost per year.

It is the flagship measure in its economic announcement, its economic update, but it refuses to say what the real annual cost will be. When a government refuses to say how much its key measure will cost, that is not transparency; it is a warning about what is to come. It shows what Canadians are going to experience in the coming years. While the government is asking people to tighten their belts and telling young people to make sacrifices, we are seeing money fly off in every direction. The government is investing at least $90 billion in Alto, a high-speed train project that the Minister of Finance recused himself from, or at least, he was supposed to. After 18 hours of Liberal monologues, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics was finally able to call the minister to answer questions.

The government is investing close to $1 billion in the program to confiscate legal, registered guns. The government is going to spend nearly $1 billion to take those guns away, when they are clearly not the problem.

The government spends $20 billion a year on outside consultants. It has hired 100,000 public servants over the past 10 years, and yet it still has to spend more than $20 billion a year on consultants. It has spent $65 billion on bureaucracy, which just keeps expanding. It spent $42 million in just one year on the Major Projects Office, which has not recommended a single project since it was created. Meanwhile, Canadian families are still having to choose between paying for groceries, paying the rent and putting gas in their cars.

That is why the priority really lies elsewhere for the Conservatives. Our priority is to put money back in the pockets of Canadians, not in the pockets of consultants, not in the pockets of well-connected insiders and not in the coffers of poorly managed megaprojects. We want to put money back in the pockets of Canadians.

I mentioned mismanaged projects. One that comes to mind straightaway is Cúram. Cúram is the latest chapter in an ongoing saga. In fact, we have not talked about it enough, and it needs to be discussed. It was in the budget. It is a computer system that was supposed to modernize pension payments, but what actually happened was that tens of thousands of seniors did not receive their cheques. These are people who worked all their lives, paid their taxes and trusted the government. What did the government do? In its economic update, with the trust of Canadians, it threw another $473 million at this fiasco. The total cost of creating this software was estimated at $1.75 billion, yet it has apparently surpassed $7 billion. That is what we are learning, because we are finding out more every day. The cost increased by 277%, for a cost overrun of $5.25 billion. That is what the Liberals' idea of sound and effective management of public finances.

It gets even worse. It might seem like this must be the end, but it is not, because there was also an internal memo forbidding public servants from telling seniors who were not receiving their cheques that the problem was caused by the new software. Two days after the economic update was released and the additional $473 million thrown at this fiasco was discovered, the government used its majority to block the opposition's requests for parliamentary documents.

Every day when a sitting of the House of Commons opens, the Speaker stands up and says, “Let the doors be opened”. Basically, the Speaker is telling the citizens to enter the people's House. However, when opposition parties ask questions, those doors close. That is not transparency. That is certainly not accountability.

I would, however, like to mention one good thing about the economic update, and that is sport. When something good is being done, we should be able to acknowledge it. The investments in amateur sport and sports federations are excellent news. It is too bad that we cannot vote on just one measure, because everyone agrees with that one. That is not a Conservative or Liberal point of view, but a Canadian point of view. The investments in sport and physical activity are good investments. That said, this measure is aimed primarily at the young people, families and volunteers who spend their evenings at rinks and fields. I look forward to seeing how direct support will be delivered to our teams on the ground. People can trust me because I am able to point out what is being done right. I am not just being partisan when I make a judgment and say that bad things are happening.

Our role is not just to criticize or oppose; it is also to put forward proposals. Conservatives believe that a government should live by the same rules as Canadian families. When money is tight, choices have to be made. The government should cut waste, reduce unnecessary spending and respect workers' money, because every dollar spent comes out of taxpayers' pockets, and that needs to be respected.

I will conclude on that note. The government needs to cut spending on consultants, trim the bureaucracy, put an end to mismanaged projects, cut waste and stop interfering in areas of provincial jurisdiction. The government also needs to excel in the few areas where the Canadian federation requires its involvement, namely borders, the armed forces, the justice system, a strong dollar and strong interprovincial trade.

This is what we should be focusing on to ensure that our constituents live in a prosperous country and feel that that is their reality.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his very interesting speech.

I will come back to what he said at the beginning about the deficit, which is lower than expected because growth was higher than expected, given that government spending was deferred. There is also another factor. The disaster mitigation and adaptation fund was used less than anticipated. If there had been more floods or fires, we would have had the expected deficit.

I want to raise another point that my colleague mentioned later in his speech: the Canada Strong fund. That is $25 billion over three years. It does not appear on the balance sheet. In accounting terms, it is off-budget because it is asset-backed. However, as the member said, it still adds $25 billion to the government's debt, even if it does not appear in the deficit.

Is that a good idea?

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is very odd. In 2024, England set up a fund exactly like that. It was a fund directly financed with debt. The British Parliament refused to call it a sovereign wealth fund because that is not what it was. The term does exist, and it applies in some countries, such as Norway. However, the concept we are discussing is not a real sovereign wealth fund.

Oddly enough, our current Prime Minister was a consultant. He was there to help the British Parliament put that in place. He knows that this is not a sovereign wealth fund. He is using the term, but not the concept.

In my opinion, that is a mistake.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member is just wrong. It is a sovereign wealth fund. Many countries around the world have sovereign wealth funds. Conservatives can say whatever they want, but at the end of the day, it is a sovereign wealth fund.

The other thing that is very clear is that we have the unholy alliance of the Conservatives and the Bloc making the decision that Canada should not have a sovereign wealth fund. They cannot make the connection between the major projects, the sovereign wealth fund and how billions of dollars are going to be used for such things as, in some cases, those major projects moving forward and, in other cases, different ways that funds can be brought in to create thousands of jobs and all sorts of economic opportunities.

Why are the Conservatives stopping progress—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Montmorency—Charlevoix.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always rather funny to hear our Liberal colleagues speaking to us as though their words are actually backed up by results. They talk about a wealth fund, meaning a fund containing wealth, but it is actually financed through debt.

I said that the British Parliament refused to call it that. It was not the Conservatives in Canada who did so, but the British Parliament. The Prime Minister was an adviser on the project. He was told it would not be called that.

The other thing my colleague just said is that Canadians are not being given the chance to make a decision. Indeed, that is what the Liberals have been doing for the past 11 years. They spend without restraint. They impose their decisions on Canadians by telling them that it is the right thing to do and that they have nothing to worry about, but we go further into debt year after year. Things are not getting any better. The country's finances are not getting any better. Over the next five years, we will lose an average of $55 billion a year. They want us to believe that money will suddenly start growing on trees and everything will be fine.

That is gambling with taxpayers' money, and it is a mistake.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a recent study by the Montreal Economic Institute estimates that the government's buy Canada policy could drive up costs by more than $12 billion a year. During an affordability crisis, does my colleague think paying much higher prices for Liberal vanity projects like Alto rail is the best way to help Canadians keep more of their hard-earned dollars in their pockets?

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question.

Once again, it is a grand idea. Canada is going to build a high-speed rail system at the taxpayers' expense. California is currently trying it out. It has already cost $300 billion, and it is not over yet. Here, they say it will cost $90 billion, but they do not say how much a ticket will cost. They are selling a project, but they are not saying how many people will be on it or how much it will cost to maintain.

We already have airlines operating between Toronto and Montreal and between Montreal and Quebec City. They pay taxes and create jobs. Now the government is going to take responsibility for this and use public funds to compete with the private sector. What is more, the government is not telling people how much it will cost to ride this infamous train. It may turn out to be more expensive and less efficient than flying. Families will not use that train, but they will be paying for it their whole lives, for generations to come.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the bill is about how much money the Liberals have actually wasted here. The PrescribeIT program is a blinding example, and it is absolutely a waste of $300 million.

Canada Health Infoway is a so-called non-profit organization funded by the federal Minister of Health. For nearly a decade, the Liberals poured money into a program called “PrescribeIT”. They promised PrescribeIT would eliminate fax machines for prescription drugs, but as a result, it was a $300-million failure.

There was $300 million spent, and fewer than 5% of prescriptions ever made were on the platform. In my province of Manitoba, a province of over one million people, the program collected just over $1,200 in fee revenue over 15 months. The Liberals promised that it would be financially self-sustainable. What a joke. However, after spending $300 million with nothing to show for it, the Liberals quietly shut down the program and hoped that Canadians would never notice.

The CEO of Canada Health Infoway, who refused to disclose his own salary at the health committee, was earning nearly $900,000 a year while this was happening. This was for a non-profit organization. He was fired last month, after the Conservatives launched an investigation.

This is what Liberal spending looks like. It is a black hole with no accountability.

Silver Alert National Framework Act

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

moved that Bill C-263, An Act to establish a national framework for silver alerts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to my bill, Bill C-263, an act to establish a national framework for silver alerts.

This bill is deeply personal to many in my community, especially the Moberg family of North Kildonan in Winnipeg. In December 2023, Earl Moberg, who suffered from advanced dementia, disappeared from his home. Again, this is in the middle of a Winnipeg winter. Despite extensive search efforts, he was never found and is presumed deceased.

Mr. Moberg was a real person. He was a husband. He was a father. He was a grandfather. He was a teacher. He was a veteran in the Canadian air force reserve. He was a man who was deeply proud of his Swedish heritage. He was a man who spent decades serving northern Manitoba communities. He was a man who loved long walks, gardening, hiking, swimming, learning and spending time with his wife and kids. Even into his later years, he remained very physically active and intellectually curious. His daughter, Britt Moberg, described him as the person she always went to for advice, until, of course, the dementia progressed and those roles were reversed and she started to have to care for him.

Like so many families that are dealing with dementia in someone they love, the Moberg family watched someone they deeply cared for slowly disappear. Then, they physically lost him as well. They were dealing with, really, two losses over a fairly short period of time, only a few years.

I think that is one of the hardest realities for families living with someone they love with dementia. They lose someone in stages. It is not just overnight. At first, it is small things. There might be repeated questions, maybe some confusion, maybe getting lost very briefly. Then, over time, safety concerns grow very serious. One day, they may be fine to be left alone or even drive their car like normal, and then the next day, it is not fine anymore. Eventually, a walk around the block can be very unsafe.

Earl's family, like all families that deal with dementia, tried their very best to adapt to a really impossible situation. They used trackers. They would redirect him when he wanted to do something that was no longer safe for him, like go for a walk by himself. His wife became a full-time caregiver for him. They sought medical assessment after medical assessment. They sought all the supports that were available to them.

However, for many families that are dealing with this, it can be incredibly overwhelming. It can be scary. It can be tremendously exhausting, emotionally, physically and mentally. While they are dealing with all these changes, their heart is breaking because they are losing someone they love, someone they used to go to for advice.

Then, in the Moberg household, one winter evening, unbeknownst to his family, Mr. Moberg walked out the front door and never came home.

I think what made this tragedy really difficult for me to stomach, personally, was that someone may have seen him but just did not know he was missing. One woman later reported that the day after he went missing, she saw a confused, older gentleman in a local lab clinic, one that he happened to frequent. He appeared a bit disoriented. He was able to say that his phone was dead, but she did not know that he was missing. She did not find out that there was a person missing until she saw, days later, a public alert online. It was only online in Manitoba. That man happened to match the description of Mr. Moberg. In fact, she went to help in the search to find him, but of course, by the time she put two and two together on this, it was far too late. She later shared with the family, as well, that she had this gut feeling that something was just off, that maybe this man needed help. We all often get these gut feelings, but we often also ignore them. We do not really have the confidence or enough information to act on that gut feeling.

That is the precise moment this bill is looking to deal with, to solve. I keep imagining that if she had received a silver alert on her phone that morning, with a description of a man who was missing, and then she also had a gut feeling when she saw a man of a similar description, maybe she would have acted. Maybe she would have called someone. Maybe she would have called emergency services. Something may have happened. Mr. Moberg, if that was him, might still be alive today if this had been in place.

That is really the core motivation for this bill, for those moments when we see someone and we also have that alert. That is when there is action. It is when those stars align that we need all the technologies, all the supports in place, to ensure that we are bringing people home safely.

Missing person cases involving seniors living with dementia are unique because of the specific vulnerability they have. They may appear normal, just a senior going for a walk. They may not even know they are in danger. They may not know they are missing. They may not be able to verbalize it. They may not remember where they live or whom to call in an emergency. They may not even know that they are dying of dehydration and hypothermia, just that they are in pain, but they cannot verbalize it.

These are uniquely time-sensitive scenarios. Public Safety Canada has stated that if a person living with Alzheimer's disease goes missing and is not found within 12 hours, they have a 50% chance of being found deceased or severely injured, notably with hypothermia and dehydration, or having drowned. Therefore, every minute matters and every hour matters. Every moment matters when we are searching for seniors with dementia who have gone missing.

However, in Canada today, whether the public is rapidly notified or not really depends on geography. Some provinces have explored silver alerts. Some have pilot programs. Some have legislation on paper, such as Manitoba, or online alerts, such as Manitoba. Some really have no operation at all.

Meanwhile, Canada already possesses the technological infrastructure capable of delivering rapid geo-targeted alerts directly to mobile devices, to televisions and to radios. We already use this infrastructure for Amber Alerts and other emergency notifications such as weather alerts and tornado warnings. I have gotten a few of those over the years. Therefore, this is not an issue of technological capability limitations. It is an issue of coordination, standards and consistent implementation across Canada.

That is why the bill was intentionally drafted as a framework bill. It would not create a federally controlled emergency alert regime, just to be very clear. We already have one of those with provinces. Instead it would recognize the constitutional reality that provinces and territories oversee policing and emergency management, while asking the federal government to provide a real national leadership role and coordination.

Specifically, the bill would require the federal government to work with provinces and territories, police, emergency management officials, care providers and other experts to develop a national framework for silver alerts. The framework would include things like harmonizing risk thresholds, improving interprovincial coordination, establishing privacy guidelines, supporting geo-targeted notifications and ensuring that alerts are issued responsibly.

I want to really emphasize that last point, because the bill is not proposing an alert for every missing person. Every missing person does matter, but it is the specific vulnerability of a senior with dementia who goes missing that is critical. The window to find them is so short. Families understand the sensitivities with issuing these alerts, and the importance of dignity and respect for the individuals.

Ms. Britt Moberg spoke very movingly about this tension to me, saying that for people living with dementia, it is difficult. Things such as “You cannot drive anymore, Dad” are difficult discussions that need respect and dignity, and that needs to be a core frame for establishing the silver alerts. We put a lot of thought into that when drafting the legislation.

In fact, Canada's existing alert infrastructure already allows alerts to be targeted with quite remarkable precision. They can be targeted to within a few city blocks, so that just the cellphones in a specific area would get an alert. That matters, because it would help reduce unnecessary disruption and reduce alert fatigue, while still mobilizing public support when someone is truly vulnerable and at imminent risk of peril. Those are really some of the key principles here: proportionate, targeted, responsible public notification for time-sensitive cases involving vulnerable people.

Importantly, this issue is becoming more urgent. By 2030, nearly one million Canadians are expected to be living with dementia. By 2050, that number is going to hit 1.7 million. People are more likely to get dementia as they age, so as our population ages, more Canadian families will, unfortunately, face what the Mobergs have faced. In the past few years, there have been some very tragic cases, including Mr. Moberg's.

In British Columbia, for example, there was a news headline the other day that said that search and rescue teams are warning that missing seniors with cognitive impairments are becoming a growing trend. In Saskatchewan, an 86-year-old man with Alzheimer's wandered out of a care home unnoticed and was later found deceased. Also in Saskatchewan, just a few weeks ago, an 82-year-old grandmother living with only mild dementia, which is difficult to deal with, vanished and was found deceased nearly two weeks later.

In Nova Scotia, a 79-year-old woman with dementia disappeared from a seniors residence. Luckily, the alert went out in some way and helped find her in time. Another Nova Scotia senior living with dementia disappeared and was unfortunately later found deceased. In Alberta, a missing 79-year-old woman with dementia was fortunately found again within the 12-hour window. Particularly tragic, in January, Quebec's coroner was investigating the death of a 90-year-old woman found outside her seniors residence after wandering out in the cold. It was reportedly the fourth similar death involving a Quebec senior in roughly one month.

These stories are happening across Canada, in every neighbourhood and in rural and remote areas. It does not matter where. There is no discrimination with this issue. It is everywhere. It is in care homes, in hospitals and in our own backyards. As our population ages, we have the responsibility to do something about this effectively and efficiently.

I want to make clear that this is not a partisan bill, not a political bill and not a left-wing or right-wing issue. This is a human issue. We have the technology to make a difference. It is in the palm of our hand every day, all day. We have it right there. We just need to mobilize it.

I want to acknowledge members from different parties, including the Liberal Party, who have reached out to me, including the Minister of Emergency Management. They have engaged in thoughtful and constructive dialogue with me on this. I am very encouraged by that.

I also want to recognize there may be amendments at committee talking about provincial jurisdictions, certain operational thresholds and various implementation details. I welcome that conversation very much, because ultimately the goal here is to save lives, and this is a tool that we can use. If this legislation helps push Canada forward toward a more coordinated, medically informed and operationally workable system that allows communities to respond faster when vulnerable seniors disappear, then this bill would have accomplished something very meaningful.

At its core, this legislation is asking a simple question: When a vulnerable senior with dementia disappears and we already possess the technology capable of notifying nearby Canadians immediately, should we use it more effectively? The Conservatives believe that the answer is resolutely, yes, we should.

I do want to dedicate this bill to the Moberg family for their courage, resilience and resolve in turning an unimaginable tragedy into meaningful action. It has been an honour to work with them and to get to know them, and we hope, together, today will be one more step toward saving lives of vulnerable seniors in Canada.

Today, the House of Commons will debate at second reading my private member's bill, Bill C‑263, an act to establish a national framework for silver alerts. This legislation is rooted in the tragic disappearance of Earl Moberg, a Winnipeg man with advanced dementia who left his home in December 2023 and never returned. His daughter, Britt Moberg, is with me here in Ottawa today.

Like so many Canadian families grappling with dementia, the Mobergs went through the extremely painful experience of watching a loved one slowly slip away even before their physical passing. The purpose of this bill is to save other families from having to experience the same tragedy.

Canada's population is aging rapidly. By 2030, nearly one million Canadians are expected to suffer from dementia. According to Public Safety Canada, about 60% of people with dementia will go missing at some point. If they are not found within 12 hours, there is a 50% chance that they will be found injured or dead from hypothermia, dehydration or drowning.

This problem affects every region of the country, including Quebec. Over the past few months, Quebec coroners have investigated a number of tragic deaths involving vulnerable seniors who wandered outside in winter. This story reminds us that people with dementia can appear to be fine, like any other senior taking a walk alone, when they are actually confused, lost and in imminent danger.

Quebec has already recognized the importance of silver alerts and has an alert system. However, the bill seeks to work in collaboration with the provinces, including Quebec, to improve national coordination, the criteria for issuing alerts, privacy protection and the responsible use of existing alert technologies. The bill also seeks to fully respect provincial jurisdictions and not to create and impose a federal system on the provinces. Rather, it calls on the federal government to collaborate with the provinces, police, emergency preparedness officials and medical experts on establishing a flexible, coordinated national framework.

Canada already has the technological infrastructure needed to quickly issue geotargeted alerts to cellphones over the same system used for amber alerts and weather alerts. The problem is not technological. The problem is a lack of coordinated, common standards across the country.

I would ask all parties from every corner of this country to seriously consider supporting this bill to go to committee for further study, and ultimately getting it over the finish line so that, as a country and as a House of Commons, we can ensure we are using the power in the palm of our hand to save lives of vulnerable seniors.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my hon. colleague from Winnipeg for bringing the bill forward. She has been a tremendous advocate, not only for this family, but for the broader community, for quite a long time now.

I am pleased to see that the bill has made its way to the floor of the House of Commons. I am certainly open to supporting the bill to the committee stage. I understand that there are some questions that might have to do with jurisdiction or with privacy.

Can my colleague can speak to some of the reasonable amendments she feels we might be able to make collaboratively at the committee stage in order to get the bill back to the House in tip-top shape, in order to make it the law of the land?

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the question from the hon. member. We work very well together on the industry committee, and it has been a pleasure to get to know him over the years.

I am not proposing any amendments, as I think the bill is great as it is, but I am very open to amendments if other parties would like to propose them.

My one concern is that I do not want to see the bill watered down to where it is just symbolic. Our goal, mine and the Moberg family's, with the advocacy they have done, is to make a real difference.

I believe, given the alert structure that exists, there is a serious federal role to be played, in the sense that it can lead. The Minister of Emergency Management and Community Resilience can call a federal-provincial-territorial meeting, for example, on silver alerts. Let us get to the table. Let us discuss a framework. Let us have some coordination across the country. There can be a real leadership role.

I just want to point out as well that right at the beginning, subsection 3(2) specifies working with provinces and territories as paramount, so it is in there.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the member for Kildonan—St. Paul on introducing this bill. I commend her for raising awareness about the fact that seniors, especially those living with dementia, need the support of their community and all members of society to help them safely navigate this difficult stage of life.

I am curious to know why Manitoba does not have a silver alert system in place. Quebec has a system that works extremely well, and Ontario has one too. The two neighbouring provinces are already working together. I am not convinced that a national standard would improve the alert service we already have in Quebec. I am curious to know what is happening in Manitoba. Does the RCMP have a resource problem?

I would like my colleague to explain why this debate is not taking place in the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I believe Manitoba has a similar silver alert framework to Quebec. Unless there has been a new development that I am not aware of, Quebec's silver alert, like Manitoba's, will go on police websites and social media. It notifies through a paper or electronic route, but not on our phones like an Amber alert or a tornado warning. Unless there has been a change in Quebec, I believe that is the case. It does not currently alert to our phones that there is a missing senior.

There is a legislative framework that exists in Manitoba, but it has not been actioned to the level of cellular devices. It is just online. As I mentioned in my remarks, a silver alert technically went out for Mr. Moberg, but it was just the online alert. That is what Manitoba is calling its silver alert. What I am calling a silver alert in the bill is more about the cellular device capabilities that we see with Amber alerts, tornado warnings and things like that.

I think Manitoba and Quebec have similar things. The problem is that they are not alerting people who are not necessarily paying attention to those notification boards. That is the problem.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from Kildonan—St. Paul for her leadership on what truly could make a difference across this country and not just in her home community, where she has personally been acquainted with the realities of tragedies that can befall families and communities when seniors go missing and we do not have a way to alert the broader community.

I think it is really critical that this contains the distribution of a system across our country for all communities so that regardless of where people live, the framework would exist. Whether they are in rural Ontario, Manitoba or the territories, they would benefit from this kind of system.

Can the hon. member share with the House any jurisdictions where this has been implemented in an electronic format as proof of its success?

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. has quite an extensive alert system. It depends on the region, but it is quite efficient. It has public billboards, sort of, across its infamous interstate system. Someone can be driving down there, going on a road trip with their family, and they will see an alert for the missing person. It can use cellular devices as well for these various alerts. The U.S. is the best example of this, and there has been some success.

I want to mention that the purpose of the national coordination is so we can get research and testimony from experts across the country, which would make it easier for the will of the provinces to get moving and do this. It is to help make this happen, because the legislation is often there, but it has not happened. This bill aims to fix that.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Emergency Management and Community Resilience]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to have the chance and the opportunity to speak to Bill C-263 today.

First, I want to thank my friend, the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, for proposing a bill that is not only meaningful to the Moberg family, and I want to salute the courage of the Moberg family who were in Ottawa today, but could make a real difference in the lives of seniors living with dementia.

I think all of us in the chamber know at least one person, have grown up with one person or, as adults, have run into one person who has dementia. Sometimes they are in our families. Sometimes they are close friends. To watch their decline over time is one of the scariest and one of the most difficult psychological things one could possibly have happen.

First of all, the individual, as they are aware of their decline, which is often the case, is terrified. Their family members are also terrified. As the hon. member said in her speech, one day the person could be watching television, conversing, having dinner with their family, and the next day they could be in a state where if they walk out the front door, they will not know how to find their way back home.

I cannot even tell members how many cases, over the course of the last 10 years that I have been a member of this place, I have heard from families with a loved one with dementia who has had a serious incident happen, and the fears that have been expressed. It goes beyond touching my heart.

The fact that the hon. member took this opportunity to hear a tragic story and use it to come forward with a piece of legislation that could improve the lives of Canadians is deeply appreciated.

As she said, this is not a partisan bill. This is not a bill that is left, right or centre. This is a human bill. The proposal of a national framework to support a coordinated silver alert system, to utilize our existing national public alerting system to issue geo-targeted notifications when a vulnerable senior disappears, would be a collaborative effort. It would be a collaborative effort between federal government, provincial government and territorial government. It would alert the public, through TV, radio and wireless devices, to a life-threatening situation. We do that right now for tornadoes, fires or Amber Alerts. The goal is to include this type of vulnerable senior in that system.

The system is very busy. In 2024 alone, 855 emergency alerts were sent out across Canada. They contained vital information during extreme storms and other critical events.

I would also note that this file is being actively worked on by the government. In budget 2025, we committed to renewing the NPAS model to better support emergency alerting throughout Canada.

Indeed, the federal government is in discussion with provincial and territorial counterparts to promote more consistent use of public alerting systems, including guidance for consistent alerting for missing vulnerable people. As such, it gives me pleasure today to say that we, as a government, intend to support the bill with targeted amendments at the committee stage. We want to ensure that some of the drafting concerns that we hope to address will be considered by the committee. Hopefully, we can find a means so that everybody in the House will be comfortable with the bill.

First, any framework must be developed in consultation with our provincial and territorial counterparts across the country, to ensure that it complements, rather than complicates, existing local protocols.

As the member mentioned, provincial and territorial governments are referenced in the bill. Perhaps there is another way that we would like to reference them. Measures proposed in the legislation do relate to an area that is in provincial jurisdiction, as the member recognized. We just want to make sure that everyone is onside.

Search and rescue operations are led, almost always, by local police services in coordination with provincial agencies and volunteer organizations like Search and Rescue Canada. We were honoured to welcome Search and Rescue Canada on the Hill this week as part of our humanitarian workforce program, for which we just announced $108 million in new funding.

When a senior goes missing in a rural township or dense urban core, the response must be immediate and tailored to that specific area or community.

In addition, many provinces have already taken steps to adopt silver alert systems for missing seniors. Quebec's non-intrusive alert system, which was announced in February 2026, aims to inform police services.

This evidence-based program also uses non-intrusive means like social media, television and radio programs to alert the public. As my colleague said, these alerts are not sent out on cellphones at the moment.

We want to make sure that we co-operate. One of the things the member mentioned is the privacy and dignity of the senior. We want to make sure that how we coordinate this under the proposal involves something that will respect the privacy and dignity of seniors and their families. I am sure that, as we understand, a silver alert would broadcast the name, photo and medical condition of an individual to possibly millions of people, depending on the area. We want to streamline this to make sure the right cases are the ones brought forward. In extreme and dangerous cases, that probably is the case. Perhaps there are other cases where it might not be, so we have to discuss that. For example, seniors who live with early-stage dementia often maintain independent lives. In some cases, their families may prefer that their medical privacy be protected as they engage in the search in the early stages. We will discuss this as part of the notification system, and I am sure we will find a collaborative solution that will work for everybody in this House.

One of the problems I wanted to mention, which I have heard from our provincial counterparts, some municipal counterparts and police, is the concern over alert fatigue. Through discussions with the provinces and territories, we want to make sure that alert fatigue does not happen. I often get complaints from people in Montreal asking why they get alerts about a child who is missing in Trois-Rivières, given the unlikelihood of the child from Trois-Rivières being in Montreal, with the phone buzzing at three o'clock in the morning. Part of this must be to figure out where the alert target area should be and what the alerts should be.

I also want to talk a bit about dementia care, because this bill brings up an important issue about dementia. The Alzheimer Society provided recommendations in its landmark study released in 2022. The Government of Canada's “A Dementia Strategy for Canada”, released in 2019, looks at not only prevention, medical treatment and cures, but also improving the quality of life of dementia patients. Many stakeholders have expressed stronger support for programs such as dementia-friendly communities led by the Alzheimer Society of Canada, with financial support from our government. This initiative supports localized efforts to implement and adapt dementia-friendly practices, including promoting awareness and strategies on how to effectively communicate with people living with dementia. For example, exactly as the member said, when we see a senior who we think might be lost, confused and scared, how do we approach them? Should we approach them? These are all things we need to teach our communities. It has to be more than just alerting family members of people who have dementia as to how to deal with dementia patients.

In January 2026, our government announced $4.7 million in funding to fund six projects under the dementia community investment program, bringing the total number of projects we have supported to 36.

Our government often talks about our commitment to ensuring the safety and dignity of all Canadians. Seniors built the communities we live and thrive in today. We owe it to them to keep them safe in all of our communities.

In conclusion, I look forward to working with the sponsor of this bill to ensure that a national approach to silver alerts is evidence-based and adequately addresses community needs and provincial concerns.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this being Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month, my thoughts go out to my friend Marie-Andrée, who is courageously battling this disease despite the difficulties she faces. I always think of my friend Marie-Andrée when we recognize Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month, because we obviously need more donations and grants to advance the research, so I want her to know I am thinking of her.

Today, we are discussing a bill on a very important topic. I have devoted my entire career to serving seniors, especially those in the process of losing their independence, first as a social worker and then as a manager within Quebec's health and social services network. I am well aware of the issues facing people living with dementia, and I am also well informed about the consequences of having a loved one with dementia. I am therefore pleased, if I may say so, to congratulate the member for introducing a private member's bill on this topic.

Basically, we have a lot of questions. We are all in favour of an alert, but we have a lot of questions. The first is that I do not understand how a coordinated system across the country could improve the Quebec system. A former spokesperson for the Montreal police said that there could be up to 12 reports of missing seniors in Montreal every day. I cannot imagine an alarm going off on people's phones every time a senior is reported missing.

I have a lot of questions and I hope that we will be able to discuss them with the member to better understand. I do not know whether she intends to use the same system as the Amber alert. In my opinion, that might not necessarily be appropriate for those with dementia, particularly because people may become desensitized and stop paying attention to such alerts if they start receiving a large number of them on their cellphones.

I am asking a lot of questions this evening to try to learn more. As the member from Quebec said, Quebec has been using the Amber alert system since 2019. At that time, Liberal minister Marguerite Blais put a pilot project in place and, because of a recent tragedy in Quebec, the silver alert program rolled out across Quebec in February 2026.

On April 17, someone from my riding went out for a drive. When a person has frontotemporal dementia, for example, they may appear to be perfectly capable and functional. They are even capable of driving, but there comes a point when they end up completely lost while driving. The alert was triggered quickly, and in just three or four hours, Ontario police found the person on the road and immediately brought them to safety. This is proof that the Quebec system works very well. It is even a model for several other provinces.

Since Quebec and Ontario are neighbours, there is a great deal of co-operation and a long-standing tradition of collaboration, I would say, between the Sûreté du Québec and Ontario police forces to ensure a rapid response. As the member said, in order to locate someone, we need to minimize delays and act quickly. I wonder what a national framework might mean for response times in Quebec and Ontario. I see it creating more complications or adding more red tape that could slow down a system that already works quite well in Quebec.

That said, I am willing to speak with the member and with the Bloc Québécois critic for seniors, the member for Shefford, to better understand her intentions. If the goal is to emulate best practices in Ontario and Quebec and encourage other provinces to do more, I would gladly have that discussion, but I still need to be convinced of how this approach would benefit Quebec.

There are, after all, organizations that represent many seniors in Quebec. Naturally, they cannot oppose a bill aimed at promoting the well-being of seniors. However, they do have some concerns about the federal government imposing additional requirements. They fear that things will become more complicated. That is what the FADOQ and the AQDR in Quebec have stated quite clearly. I agree with the member. This is not about engaging in a partisan debate between the right and the left. That is not the issue. When things are going well in a province and neither community groups nor police forces are calling for changes to a system that is working, I wonder if this bill a good solution, particularly for Quebec. I remain open to being convinced. Obviously, if the provinces want to adopt a single system, that is their prerogative. It is their decision, and we cannot oppose that.

We believe that the provinces are in the best position to implement the criteria to trigger an alert, because they control and coordinate their police and health care systems. Unlike many provinces, Quebec has its own police force, the Sûreté du Québec, which is similar to Ontario's police force, the OPP. Quebec has developed its own communications practice. Could this collaboration, which has been built by experience, be weakened by adding an additional layer with the goal of creating a national approach? Trying to do so often makes the process more complicated. I am not sure whether the Sûreté du Québec or even the Government of Quebec would be willing to reopen the issue of standards, given that Quebec has just adopted its own. Shortly after they were adopted, we had examples of seniors with dementia being found quickly because the silver alert is truly meant to alert the public. The decision of whether to issue an alert is up to the police force, which would be the Sûreté du Québec in this case.

I would love to meet with my colleague from Kildonan—St. Paul so I can understand how this bill would benefit Quebec's seniors and so we can start a conversation on this issue. She should also understand that, at present, we are neither for nor against her bill. We are more in an exploratory phase, because we feel that the member's speech, as well as the answers she gave to questions, are not yet comprehensive enough to allow me to continue my deliberations.

I would like to congratulate my colleague on introducing this bill, which does address the important need to protect older people and those with dementia who need the wider community to look after them. I invite her to come and discuss this with me and our seniors critic, the member for Shefford, so that we can better understand her intentions and, above all, so that she can reassure us about the model she wishes to develop. The model differs from Amber alerts. As my colleague from Mont-Royal says, we certainly do not want Quebeckers to become desensitized, because they are used to seeing Amber alerts for missing children or very serious disappearances. If we increase the number of alerts, they might think that it is just a false alarm, no big deal, and then they might let their guard down. We want to avoid that at all costs.

I invite my colleague to come speak to us and continue the conversation.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my colleague, the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, for bringing forward this exceptionally important bill. She has done meaningful work on this issue, including sponsoring a petition that garnered over 7,300 signatures.

This legislation represents another step forward in responding to a very real and growing concern facing Canadians. Bill C-263, the silver alert national framework act, speaks to something that is very simple, but it is also very urgent. Tens of thousands of vulnerable seniors living with dementia go missing every year in Canada. When that happens, every minute matters.

Canada is undergoing a significant demographic shift, and our population is aging rapidly. By 2030, over 1 million Canadians are expected to be living with dementia, rising to 1.7 million by 2050. That estimate comes from national research by the Alzheimer Society of Canada, which tracks how quickly dementia rates are rising as our population ages. With this rise in cases of missing elderly persons, there is great concern as baby boomers are aging.

New data shows that one in four seniors over 85 has a form of dementia, which is resulting in more seniors wandering away from home. Senior advocacy groups state that the preliminary data being collected shows that between 50,000 to 60,000 people out of the nearly 1 million Canadians with dementia are reported missing each year, and these numbers are rising.

Families and communities across the country are already dealing with this reality, trying desperately to keep loved ones safe while navigating the uncertainty dementia causes every day. This pressure will only increase in the years ahead. Those who know someone living with dementia understand how quickly a routine walk can become disorienting, how everyday surroundings can suddenly feel unfamiliar and how easily someone can lose their way. They live with the constant fear that a loved one could wander and not know how to get home. Caregivers are often carrying far more responsibilities and worries than people realize. Many describe living with this constant fear, wondering whether it is safe to step away, to run an errand or to allow themselves just a few moments for self-care.

The first hour after someone goes missing is often marked with hesitation. Caregivers check familiar places, call neighbours, retrace routes and only later realize how much time has passed. Those early moments are filled with uncertainty. By the time they reach out for help, valuable time has already slipped away. It is said that, if an older person is gone for more than 24 hours, there is only a fifty-fifty chance that they will be found safe, making this a matter of life and death. When a loved one does go missing, caregivers frequently shoulder an immense emotional burden. They replay decisions, question their judgment and carry guilt, even when they did nothing wrong.

For many years, I worked closely with nursing homes and seniors and heard directly from staff and families about the daily realities of caring for people living with dementia. One concern that is mentioned is how often individuals find a way to wander. In many cases, the outcomes were fortunate, and someone was found at a bus stop, a coffee shop, or on a walk on a familiar route. However, there are also cases with far more serious consequences, where delays in locating someone led to harm that could have been prevented. Those experiences underscore the importance of early notification and a system that responds quickly when the unexpected happens.

When a vulnerable senior goes missing, families do not experience time in the usual way. Every minute feels longer. Every moment carries the weight of uncertainty. Families search. They make the calls. They are pacing. Above all, they hope someone somewhere will be able to help bring their loved one back home safely. Police, search and rescue teams, and first responders do extraordinary work in these situations. They search large and unfamiliar areas, coordinate volunteers, review camera footage and track movement patterns while racing daylight, weather and long tiring hours.

In many cases, responders work across multiple jurisdictions. The local municipal police force, provincial resources and community volunteer search teams are all trying to piece together the same information at the same time. Conflicting alerts slow this coordination, and delays widen the search area. First responders consistently tell us the same thing, which is that a clear, national framework would help responders narrow their focus sooner and act with greater precision. Early, accurate public awareness makes a huge difference on the ground.

The bill is inspired, in part, by a very unfortunate tragedy that occurred in Winnipeg in 2023, which was when Mr. Earl Moberg went missing. Mr. Moberg was an 81-year-old husband, father and grandfather who disappeared from his home and was never found. In the wake of that loss, his family acted. They launched a petition calling for the implementation of a silver alert system so no other family would have to endure that same heartbreak.

Bill C-263 would require the federal government to work collaboratively with territories, provinces and police services to establish a national standard and coordination for silver alerts. Provinces and territories already take the lead in policing and emergency response, and the legislation would respect that reality. The federal role would ensure that the systems align, that information flows and that standards are shared. The goal of the legislation is straightforward: Canadians' being notified quickly when a vulnerable senior goes missing, in order to bring them home safely.

In my community of Cambridge, and in communities across this country, people understand what it means to look out for each other during moments of crisis. We see it when neighbours check in, when local businesses stay alert and when people step up to help when they know what to look for. However, good intentions alone do not help families when a vulnerable senior has disappeared. They must be supported by systems that allow accurate information to reach the public without delay so people can respond constructively rather than react after the fact.

These challenges are often more acute in rural and smaller communities. Distances are greater, lighting can be limited, and familiar landmarks can disappear quickly when someone moves beyond a town centre. A person can travel well outside a safe radius without even being noticed. In those settings, rapid public notification would allow our farmers, shopkeepers, drivers and neighbours to stay alert in real time. A national approach would ensure that geography does not determine how quickly a family receives support.

Canadians pay attention to public alerts because they are reserved for serious situations. Canadians are already familiar with the value of a coordinated alert system through the Amber Alert program. We have seen how quickly it mobilizes the public and how effective it can be. Lives have been saved because communities were notified early.

Bill C-263 recognizes that seniors living with dementia deserve the same level of urgency and public communication when they go missing. Canada already has the tools needed to do this. The national public alerting system can issue rapid, geo-targeted alerts across cellphones, radio and television. This bill would not create something new. It would enhance the use of what is already in place.

A national framework for silver alerts would help establish shared standards, clear processes and reliable coordination across jurisdictions. It would support first responders and communities by ensuring that information is timely and actionable. The bill speaks directly to families searching for a loved one, caregivers waiting for news, first responders working against the clock, and communities willing to help when they are informed. Dementia may change the way someone sees the world, but it should not change the way the world sees them.

The difference between a coordinated response and a delayed one can be the difference between bringing someone home safe or never having that chance again. The legislation would allow Parliament to respond more effectively when families need our help the most.

I encourage all members of the House to give Bill C-263, the silver alert national framework act, thoughtful consideration and to work together so that when a vulnerable senior goes missing, Canadians are prepared to respond, because every minute matters.