House of Commons Hansard #127 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was economy.

Topics

line drawing of robot

This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Parliament of Canada Act First reading of Bill C-278. The bill requires Members of Parliament who change political parties to face a by-election to seek their constituents' approval, aiming to prevent MPs from unilaterally altering the democratic will of voters. 300 words.

Clarity Act First reading of Bill C-279. The bill seeks to repeal the federal Clarity Act, arguing that the existing legislation undermines democratic principles and that Quebec alone should determine its future based on a 50% plus one majority vote. 300 words.

Petitions

Opposition Motion—Economic Policies Members debate a Conservative motion claiming Canada is in a full-blown recession. Conservatives criticize the government, citing the highest G7 household debt and rising unemployment, while demanding a new economic plan. Liberals dismiss these claims as alarmist, pointing to future economic growth and strategic investments. The Bloc Québécois emphasizes an export crisis linked to trade failures. Finally, the House pauses to bid farewell to MP Jonathan Wilkinson as he departs for a new diplomatic role. 49300 words, 6 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives emphasize that Canada is the only G7 country in recession, blaming Liberal mismanagement for fleeing investment and rising unemployment. They highlight historic food insecurity and call for abolishing the temporary foreign worker program. Finally, they criticize the government’s response to rising anti-Semitism and the Prime Minister’s perceived lack of leadership.
The Liberals defend their economic plan, citing foreign direct investment and trade diversification. They highlight affordability measures like the groceries and essentials benefit and dental care. The government also emphasizes investments in nuclear energy and green aluminum, while addressing rising anti-Semitism and reform for Indigenous child services.
The Bloc advocates for a wage subsidy to protect Quebec's expertise and jobs. They demand duty buybacks to save the forestry industry while criticizing Liberal backtracking on climate and missed environmental targets.
The NDP advocate for fair federal funding for BC Ferries. They also accuse the immigration minister of providing misleading information regarding the 10-day timeline for processing study permits for Palestinian students.
The Greens support a thorough investigation into concerns regarding documentation from main estimates committee sessions.

Remarks by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux argues that allegations from the opposition regarding misleading statements represent a difference of opinion rather than a matter of privilege, asserting that parliamentary disputes over facts should remain subjects of debate. 700 words.

Arab Heritage Month Act Report stage of Bill S-227. The bill S-227 proposes designating April as Arab heritage month in Canada. Members from all parties expressed strong support for the legislation, emphasizing the historical and ongoing contributions of Arab Canadians to the country's economy, arts, and culture. Proponents argue the designation will foster inclusivity and counter discrimination, while recognizing the diverse histories and achievements of communities that have shaped Canada. 8100 words, 1 hour.

Adjournment Debates

International law and Middle East Elizabeth May criticizes the government for failing to condemn U.S. and Israeli military strikes against Iran, arguing they violate international law. Rob Oliphant defends Canada’s diplomatic approach, emphasizing the importance of international agreements, humanitarian law, and targeted sanctions while stressing that lasting solutions require negotiation rather than military action.
Canadian dental care plan administration Gord Johns critiques administrative hurdles and eligibility review processes causing anxiety for seniors and veterans in the dental care plan. Maggie Chi defends the program's reach, noting ongoing efforts to verify eligibility and ensure program sustainability, while promising to work with affected individuals to find equitable solutions.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:40 a.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague said that exports are down in Canada. Everyone is aware that the effects of the U.S. tariffs are very likely having an impact on exports to the U.S. However, the Prime Minister promised a new policy, namely that we would move away from the U.S. and develop partnerships around the world, which would compensate for the challenges associated with the U.S.

Does my colleague think that the data show that this strategy is working?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:40 a.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, no government in Canada has ever argued that diversification is a bad thing. I believe it was Stephen Harper who signed our free trade agreement with South Korea, was it not? I would have to check. I think it was. Governments have signed free trade agreements.

Government members go around saying that Canada is protected, that it has the most bilateral agreements with G7 nations. Of course, the government has always sought to diversify trade. However, we have to consider the reality of our geography and interdependence with certain industries. Canada's automotive industry cannot exist without the U.S. market, which is close by. We need to do both.

The Prime Minister is pitting the two against each other. He is turning the diversification strategy into rhetoric which, in my view, is damaging our trade relationship with the United States. That relationship will one day be restored. This situation is getting to the point where the human impact—the impact on families and jobs—is very real. The government cannot spend its time simply sending out cheques in an economy where exports are declining, especially for Canada, which is a small open economy dependent on its exports, regardless of where it exports to.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:45 a.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Madam Speaker, my question concerns the Bloc Québécois's economic approach. It is clear that the Liberals, the former Conservatives and the current Conservative Party all think alike when it comes to the economy. It is always about economic growth, but without regard for the well-being of everyone.

What do my colleague from Mirabel and the Bloc Québécois think of the circular economy or Kate Raworth's book Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist? Could my colleague explain what the Bloc Québécois's approach to envisioning a different economy entails?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:45 a.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, there is growth, wealth, income and the way they are distributed.

The Bloc Québécois's approach is quite simple. We note that fiscal capacity and room to manoeuvre are concentrated in Ottawa. Education, child care, health care, social services and municipalities—which are facing a homelessness crisis—fall under provincial jurisdiction or are directly provincial responsibilities. If we want a more just, more inclusive society with greater social mobility, transfers need to increase, and Ottawa needs to stop trying to create a social safety net managed by Cúram, that is not even capable of issuing cheques. That is our view.

As for the circular economy, we need an economy that is more environmentally friendly and generates less waste. We need an economy that takes all these issues into account. Twenty or 30 years ago, we were filling landfills. Today, we realize that what we threw away were resources that can be recovered and given value, provided we create a market for them. In my opinion, that is an approach for the future.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned a situation earlier and wondered whether it was the Harper government that established free trade with South Korea. The answer is a categorical yes. Members may recall that, under the visionary leadership of Ed Fast, the then minister of international trade, Canada, under Mr. Harper, had free trade agreements with 40 or so nations. Plus, back in 1988, when free trade with the United States was being debated, we received the support of Quebeckers, especially prominent Quebeckers like Bernard Landry and Jacques Parizeau, who spoke out in favour of free trade.

I would appreciate it if the member could explain why free trade is important for Canada and especially for Quebec.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:45 a.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, free trade allows us to specialize in the things we do best. It is not a contest to see who is the best and who is not. What I was trying to illustrate is that diversification has always been a constant battle for successive federal governments. The miracle that this Prime Minister is promising is decades in the making. The thing he is promising to deliver within three years in order to win votes is not going to happen within three years. It is something that happens gradually. I think he needs to work on improving his relationship with our neighbours to the south.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in today's debate on Canada's economic future, particularly with regard to the reality facing all Canadians as we speak, because yes, sadly, Canada is in a recession. It is with great joy and pleasure that I will share my time with my distinguished colleague from Calgary Crowfoot, and I thank all those who are vigilant, unlike myself, who have unfortunately dropped the ball. In that regard, I will have a few words to say about people who have dropped the ball.

We are not happy to note that Canada is in a recession. As all economists know, a country is in a recession when its gross domestic product, or GDP, is negative for two consecutive quarters. Some may seek to qualify this particular recession, but, mathematically speaking and quite clearly, it is defined as follows: If the GDP is down for two consecutive quarters, it is a recession, and that is what we are dealing with.

Some have tried to quibble over this definition of a recession. However, beyond the quibbling, there is the reality of the hardships faced by Canadians—hardships that have plagued Canada for far too long. We have the worst food inflation among G7 countries. Every month, 2.2 million Canadians turn to food banks for food. Let us not forget that we are in Canada. Of that number, one-third are children. Families, fathers and mothers, cannot afford to provide for themselves and must resort to visiting food banks.

I want to mention some folks in my riding, including people at Amélie et Frédérick and community fridges in Val‑Bélair, L'Ancienne‑Lorette and Loretteville on Racine. These people are working hard to provide food aid, and God knows their work is essential. We are fortunate that these volunteers with various charities in every riding, especially my riding, Louis‑Saint‑Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, are thinking of the least fortunate. The thing is, these folks are telling me that the people who donated to food banks for years are now the ones coming to food banks so they can feed their families properly.

Unfortunately, Canada also has the second-highest unemployment rate among G7 countries. That is the reality in Canada. Those are the problems Canadians are facing. This confirms the sad reality that Canada is in a recession: those 112,000 jobs that were lost since the beginning of the year. There is the reality faced by entrepreneurs who want to invest but are dealing with serious concerns about economic stability. They cannot invest in an environment that is not stable, and the Canadian economy is currently losing momentum. We can also see the impact in trade flows. Some $20 billion in investment has left Canada, on top of the $1 trillion in investment that has not been made in Canada over the past 10 years under Justin Trudeau and the current Prime Minister. That is why we feel that the Canadian economy is weakening, that it is declining and that it is in recession.

It is also important to understand that, over the last 10 years, Liberal governance has, unfortunately, not changed much. Take a look at what happened between 2015 and 2025, and from 2025 until today. Unfortunately, we are still on the same track. The government spends without restraint, it shows no concern for properly managing the money of Canadians who pay GST every day and their taxes every month, when our primary responsibility, as parliamentarians, is to ensure that the money is spent wisely. We have been living beyond our means for nearly 11 years. The debt has risen by $1 trillion, which is almost twice the total debt accumulated over the previous 125 years. That is the reality of Liberal management: $1 trillion in additional debt.

Last week, I had an exchange with the Minister of Finance during committee of the whole. I reminded him that he is the third-most senior minister in the government, since the Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, Intergovernmental Affairs and One Canadian Economy and the Minister of Industry were both appointed ministers as soon as Mr. Trudeau was elected. Six months later, the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, the current Minister of Finance, was appointed.

Today, as Minister of Finance, he is responsible for debts totalling $1 trillion, because that $1 trillion in debt has accumulated over the past 10 years. That is money we do not have. That is money that had to be printed. That is debt we are passing on to our children, our grandchildren, and our great-grandchildren, who have not yet been born but who will have to pay for it. That is why we must be careful. That is why we need a positive, winning strategy for Canadians.

Our Conservative approach is basically to leave more money in the pockets of Canadians. Two months ago, we started a debate about transportation and gas taxes. That affects all Canadians, not just those who have a gas-powered car. We know that the goods we buy, like food, do not fall from the sky. These goods are transported, and, in many cases, gas is involved. This gas tax affects all Canadians.

Our proposal was very clear: Abolish all federal taxes for the entire year. That would leave $5 billion more in the pockets of Canadians. We believe that people are better at managing their money than the government, to whom they send their money in the form of taxes.

The government used our idea to fuel theirs, no pun intended. They decided to temporarily cut the excise tax by 10¢ for a few months. To paraphrase Neil Armstrong's words in reverse, cutting the tax may be a giant leap for the Liberals, but it is a small step for taxpayers. That is why we need to go much further.

Our approach is to abolish all federal taxes. That would leave $5 billion more in the pockets of Canadians. That is how we can help people.

We also wanted to unlock the full potential of Canada's natural resources. I have had plenty of opportunities to discuss this in my time here and on prior occasions when I was in the National Assembly. I am an ardent fan and strongly in favour of all the natural resources we have and all energy sources. When I talk about energy, I mean green energy, renewable energy and so-called fossil fuels.

Canada has it all. Canada has every energy source that countries would go to war over. Canada has all the natural resources it needs to achieve its own and the planet's full potential. Canada is ready to go. Unfortunately, the government spent a decade holding back the development that Canada needs, that Canadians need and that the whole world needs. The whole world needs more energy. It needs the natural resources and rare materials that Canada has. The way I see it, there is no such thing as going too far with any of this.

Furthermore, we must continue to open the door to free trade with countries around the world. As I mentioned a few moments ago, that has been the case in Canada since Brian Mulroney's terms in office, since the 1988 free trade agreement and since Jean Chrétien's efforts to extend that North American agreement. I am also proud to add that, under Stephen Harper, we truly broke down barriers by concluding agreements with nearly 40 countries, and that is a good thing. I am very pleased to see that the current government is following in those footsteps.

We must continue in this direction, while recognizing that Canada is a champion of free trade. If free trade creates real wealth for Canadians, then it should go hand in hand with lower taxes and lower taxation. If we are capable of that, if we are a global model for free trade, then we should also practise free trade within our own country.

I therefore urge the government to go further. That is why, unfortunately, Canada is in a recession. Canada deserves better.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:55 a.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, my concern is that the Conservatives tend to want to jump up and proclaim that Canada is in a recession, such as they did on Friday. Even the Bank of Canada has cautioned the Conservatives and others. Saying Canada is in a recession is premature at best. The Conservatives know that, yet they seem to want to glorify the word in order to plant fear in the minds of Canadians.

The member put many comments on the record just now. He talked about trade and the importance of trade. We have had 20-plus trade and defence-related agreements in the last year under this new Prime Minister, who was elected just one year ago. He talked about energy. This Prime Minister has talked about making Canada a super energy supplier going into the future. Take a look at the major projects.

I wonder if the member would—

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:55 a.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the comments by my colleague from Winnipeg North, even if they are wrong.

The problem is, where are the results? People are asking for real results.

I am sure the member remembers well the campaign promise by the leader of the Liberal Party 15 months ago. He said it would be elbows up and he told America we would be strong again. When he got elected, he went to the White House. What did he do? It was far from elbows up. He was humble.

What did he do a week ago? He went to New York. What did he say? He said we will make America great again. Who can believe it? This is the truth. This is the reality.

Imagine if a Conservative had said that in New York. Those guys would have been in a nuclear war against us.

The truth is that this country needs real effects and real results—

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

Noon

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

Questions and comments.

The hon. member for Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

Noon

Bloc

Alexis Deschênes Bloc Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC

Mr. Speaker, my colleague wanted to talk about natural resources in particular. One economic sector in serious difficulty in Quebec is the forestry industry.

In the Gaspé, where I come from, forestry businesses are often family-owned. Those that export their products have been hit with 45% countervailing duties since October. One business operating in my riding is struggling financially. I am talking about Damabois, which has plants in Cap‑Chat and Matane. Two hundred jobs across Quebec could be at risk. Clearly, the government is not doing enough to support the forestry industry.

Does my colleague agree with me that the government should do more to support Quebec forestry companies?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

Noon

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for standing up for the businesses in his riding and in his part of the country. He does a good job of representing those people, unlike what we have seen over the past 10 years.

I want to point out that we think that all natural resources should be developed properly. The best way for the government to help businesses is to find markets for them, support them in their search for new markets and reduce the related tax burden. Giving out hundreds of thousands of dollars and subsidies is not going to help. Instead, the government needs to help businesses develop markets and ensure that they have more money in their coffers so that they can invest in the future with the help and support of governments. The government needs to give them more room to act by opening up markets.

Canada has representatives around the world, so lumber from the Gaspé region could be sold around the world.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

Noon

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Mr. Speaker, when we listen to the Liberal government, we get the same message: Canadians have never had it so good. We have 2.2 million Canadians going to food banks every month. We have out-of-control crime. We have the only shrinking economy in the G7. We have the only shrinking economy among Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. About one-quarter of Canadians are living with food insecurity right now under the Liberal government.

Does the member think Canadians have never had it so good, as the Liberals are claiming?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

Noon

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his hard work, which I appreciate. I have known him for the last 10 years. He works hard for Canadians and the people in his riding.

Let me be clear about this. Unfortunately, for all of the promises made by the Liberals, especially the Prime Minister we have right now who, in campaigns from coast to coast a year ago, said his way was the right way, it would be elbows up and we would be very strong because he knew about the banking system, there have been no results yet.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

Noon

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to speak to opposition motions. Today Conservatives call on the House to recognize that the Liberal Prime Minister has given Canada the only recession in the G7. It is so sad that it has come to this and that we have to call on the House to recognize the sad fact that Canada is in a recession and is the only country in the G7 for which that is the case.

Why is Canada alone in the G7? The government has blamed international events and continues to blame international factors for Canada's poor economic performance, but I point out to the House that every other G7 country faces the same international factors. The Liberals cite war in Ukraine, in the Persian Gulf and in Iran, but this affects all countries. They talk about the trade war that we certainly do not want and did not ask for in Canada, but I point out that the United States is tariffing itself. It faces tariffs. It has made the decision to make its own citizens pay tariffs on what it imports, yet it is not in a recession. It is Canada alone among G7 countries that is in a recession, so we have to look at other factors driving this.

The Conservative motion calls on the government to recognize that Canada has the worst household debt in the G7. There was devastating testimony at the finance committee about a month ago. Equifax and TransUnion, two of the businesses that track consumer debt behaviour, informed the committee that indebted Canadians are getting deeper in debt. They are going further into debt, and the credit balloon is continuing to expand but not with additional players.

It is not that Canadians are buying homes for the first time, or this kind of thing, and becoming new participants in credit. No, indebted Canadians are getting deeper in debt. They are coping with this not with higher salaries and higher incomes to pay their debts. They are stretching out their payments, refinancing their loans, skipping out on essentials, cutting back on other expenses and exhausting their savings. This is not sustainable. This is not going to give us a consumer-led recovery, because consumers are tapped out.

In fact, Food Banks Canada just released a report that says that among lower-income Canadians, food, other essentials and housing combined are more than 100% of the average household budget. People at the lowest levels are the people getting deeper in debt. They cannot afford food. They cannot afford gasoline. They cannot afford housing. They are coping with it by exhausting any savings they might have and getting deeper into debt.

Affordability is part of the crisis that we find ourselves in. With respect to housing, we call upon the government, in the motion, to acknowledge that we have the worst housing affordability in the G7. A first-time homebuyer, a young person or young family hoping to establish a new household and buy a home as part of a long-term financial plan or as a way to put down roots in a community, has not have a hope under the government.

The Liberals have presided over the astonishing run-up in the cost of housing that has shut out a generation of young Canadians from home ownership and traps people in rents that they are increasingly unable to afford. Rent has more than doubled under the Liberal government. Even though rents have been coming down for the last 18 months, as it has pointed out, they are still more than double what they were when the government took office.

We see housing as unaffordable. The Liberals have killed the dream of home ownership for a generation of Canadians. They have created a country in which one's ability to become a homeowner is really tied up in the question of whether or not their parents were homeowners and are able to share their equity with their children by refinancing their own home, lending them the money, co-signing, or all the different things.

I was in the mortgage industry, and for the entire length of my career, a normal person with a normal, proper job who wanted to buy a home could save up the down payment over a period of a year or two and could come in, qualify for a mortgage and buy a home. That is simply impossible now in almost all of Canada's major cities. It is a real shame. We heard testimony to that effect at the finance committee.

Our motion calls upon the government to present a plan to reverse the situation we are in. The Liberal government squandered the opportunity it had when it was first elected. Let us go back in time for a minute to 2015. In 2015, when the government was sworn in, it had a balanced budget and a conditionally approved pipeline to the west coast. Literally days after the government was sworn in, it cancelled the northern gateway pipeline.

If that pipeline had been built, it would right now be pumping 525,000 barrels a day to world markets. Let us think of the economic activity just from that one project alone. At today's prices, that is nearly $50 million a day. Let us think of the tax revenue foregone by the government. Let us think of the paycheques that do not exist from all the jobs that would go into the production and transmission of 525,000 barrels a day at today's prices.

The Liberal government blew it, and that was just one pipeline. There was also not yet an application, but there was an intent to build an east coast pipeline as well, and the government chased off that project when it started musing about changing, even before it put in Bill C-69, which really nailed the door shut and made sure no pipelines would ever get produced. What the Liberal government has done is it squandered the opportunity.

There were years when there was a strong world economy in the early years of the Liberal government, and the Liberals blew it. They still ran up deficits. They spent the cupboard bare in times of relative prosperity globally. Ever since then, they have been less able to cope with crises and have left us where we are today, extraordinarily in debt with a $67-billion deficit that the government just tabled and fiscal anchors that have been just cut loose. They announce one and then they abandon it.

The Liberals have presided over a productivity crisis that, two full years ago, the senior deputy governor of the Bank of Canada said was a break-glass emergency. Well, the Liberals did not break the glass and deal with the emergency. They have just fumbled along right up to this very day.

The Prime Minister told everybody, about 15 months ago, that he was the man for a crisis and that he was the person who would have a deal with Trump's America by July 2025. The Prime Minister said that this was the time for prudent fiscal management and that as a banker he had the skills to manage the national budget. He said that he was a man for a crisis. It was all an illusion. Here we are now at a time when we are in a recession. We are the most indebted country in the G7. We have food bank usage that is off the chart. We have housing that is staggeringly unaffordable.

We have the same global concerns as every other country, but we are the one that is in a recession. The responsibility for that lies on the Prime Minister, and the 10 and a half years of financial and economic mismanagement that has occurred under the Prime Minister and the government's watch.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the member needs a reality check.

Just over a year ago, Canada went to the polls and elected a new Prime Minister with impeccable credentials. Rents have actually gone down since he became the Prime Minister. The average household net worth has increased since the new Prime Minister came to office. Since then, we have had a AAA credit rating and the best financial position in the G7. There are so many things taking place, such as the major projects and a budget that delivers in many different ways to Canadians, yet the Conservatives consistently go around spreading misinformation to try to make it look as if Canada is broken, which is not true.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, there we have it again: another Liberal saying that Canadians have never had it so good. I really wonder whom the member talks to.

The member raised the issue of the net worth of Canadians. I wonder if he has bothered to determine just how that average number might work out. Is it that there is an extraordinarily small number of people who have seen their assets inflate in value while the typical Canadian household is deeply in debt, getting deeper in debt and exhausting its savings just to keep up with bills?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Bloc

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke about how the Conservatives want to eliminate all the fuel taxes. That would cost the government at least $5 billion.

Would my colleague support scrapping all of the oil subsidies so that the government can recoup that money?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, if the member meant that we have called upon the federal government to eliminate all the federal taxes on fuel, he is correct that we have called upon it to do so. We are disappointed that the government has not done it.

As for subsidies, we are the party of free enterprise, and if the government would simply eliminate all the regulations and laws it has passed since 2015 that prevent projects from being built, we would be much better off today. I spoke about a couple of specifics on that in my speech, but it is on the government and its red tape that is holding Canada and our industries back.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Muys Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook—Brant North, ON

Mr. Speaker, 12 years ago, the front page of The New York Times declared Canada as having the richest, most prosperous middle class in the world. Eleven years after the Liberals took office, as my colleague mentioned in his speech, there is record household debt and delinquency, and the middle class is suffering. How is this possible in a country that is so blessed with the resources that Canada has?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is possible because there was a change of government in 2015, and the new government blew it. It really is that simple.

I mentioned some of the other advantages, from a government point of view, that the Liberals inherited from the previous government, in fact from previous governments. There was a decades-long running consensus around fiscal discipline in the House, and the Liberals blew it. They inherited, yes, what The New York Times described as the world's most prosperous middle class. This was a country where people could get ahead if they just did the work. A normal person could go to school, get a job, save a bit of money, buy a house, put down roots and start a family in a nice, safe neighbourhood. That is the country the Liberals inherited, and they blew it.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Vancouver Granville B.C.

Liberal

Taleeb Noormohamed LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

I would like to begin where this motion does not. I will not begin with the numbers, but with the people this motion is supposed to be about. Somewhere, today, there is a parent at a kitchen table, running the math on a mortgage renewal for a second time because the first answer could not possibly be right. There is a young person in the same house who did everything they were asked to and is now looking at the cost of a home and wondering whether this country still has room for them. I am not going to tell either of them that these things are better than they feel. They are actually not, and we all know that. That worry is real, and it deserves a serious response, which is exactly what this motion is not, so this is where I part ways with the member who put this motion forward.

The Conservative Party offers that family a story that all of this is the fault of one or two people, conjured in a single year, and that the cure, which the member just spoke about, is to simply tear things down. It is a tidy story. It asks nothing hard of the party that is telling it. It is a bid for power and a social media clip dressed up as an answer, but it is wrong. It is wrong about how we got here, and it is emptiest precisely where it ought to be the fullest, which is on what they would actually do instead. The members opposite are just about everything they are not and have no ideas about what we should be doing.

Let us give that family an honest answer. The pressure did not arrive all at once. It built slowly over decades, through what successive governments of all stripes and at all levels chose to do and, far more often, chose to put off. There were too few homes built year after year, infrastructure was deferred and deferred again and productivity was left adrift while other countries pulled ahead. The one I know best is that, for decades, we let it become too hard to build big things in this country. Governments left the walls standing between our provinces so that it stayed easier to trade with another country than to trade with one another.

None of it was inevitable. It was the accumulated cost of choosing not to act. The bill for everything that was waiting came up at the very moment the global economy was being torn up and rewritten. There are tariffs at levels not seen in generations and supply chains are fracturing under conflict in Europe and the Middle East. The Prime Minister has called this what it is: a rupture, not a transition.

I did not come to this chamber as a political staffer. I did not grow up in politics. I came from building companies and creating actual jobs. I know what it takes to start something, to make payroll and to scale a business past the point that it is fragile.

I know the patterns the members opposite never name. In this country, we generate world‑class research. We build competitive firms and then, sometimes, we watch the industrial scale, the intellectual property, the jobs and the talent migrate somewhere else. This pattern is not a law of nature, but a result of choices. This is a government that has finally made the other choice. It has chosen to back our champions, keep our IP here, keep jobs here, build talent here and let Canadian companies scale without having to leave Canada to do it ever again.

We have made it easier to build big things again with the Major Projects Office so that nation-building projects stop dying in the queue. Ground has already broken on projects, like the port expansion in Montreal, which will move Canadian goods to the world for decades, and there are four major projects in my own province of British Columbia. The One Canadian Economy Act tears down the internal trade walls I just described. We have a productivity superdeduction so that businesses can write off investment right away and have a reason to make it here. We have a plan to unlock $1 trillion in investment over the next five years. We have $6 billion and 100,000 new skilled trades workers through team Canada strong so that we have the hands to build what we approve. We have Build Canada Homes, which is not another task force, but an actual builder with more than 7,500 homes already under way in this country.

Here is how I know it is working. It is showing up in my own province. Anglo Teck is choosing Canada as its headquarters, bringing blue- and white-collar jobs to British Columbia. Torys is opening up a new office in Vancouver. Lululemon is keeping its headquarters in British Columbia. These are companies that could plant their flag anywhere on earth, and they are choosing here because they see what British Columbia and Canada have to offer. They are betting on our prosperity. They would not place that bet on a country in decline.

The Conservatives are gleeful about the fact that there are challenges in this country. They propose no solutions and they continue to tear down, but what the rest of the world is seeing, through foreign direct investment, companies moving their headquarters here, talent coming to this country and researchers coming to this country, is that this is the place to build a future. That is because we have a Prime Minister and a government that are focused on that, know what it takes to build big things and are prepared to do the heavy lifting to get it done.

The wider proof is real. Wages have outpaced inflation every single month this government has been in office. Foreign investment, as I said, is flowing to us faster now than it is to any of our closest peers. It is at an 18‑year high. Canada has now surpassed the United States as the most attractive market in the world for infrastructure investment. Our economy is now projected to grow the second fastest in the G7 this year and next. To me, this is not the portrait of a country in retreat, but a country that has decided to build again.

The member opposite asked the government to “immediately...reverse all the economic policies” that got us here. I would ask him to be honest about what that actually means. Does it mean reversing the Major Projects Office? Does it mean eliminating the superdeduction that rewards firms for investing in this country? Does it mean eliminating the work to tear down the walls between our provinces or the $6 billion for 100,000 new tradespeople?

While he is at it, let him tell that family at the kitchen table which of their savings he means to take back. Is it the national school food program, which his own party has called “garbage”? Is it the child care that his party leader calls a “slush fund”, which has benefited people in his own riding? Is it the dental care that seniors in his communities are currently benefiting from? Are those the programs he would choose to roll back?

To the Conservatives, the help that gets a family through the month is a line item that they sneer at. It is something to be looked down upon. To us, it is precisely the point. It is lifting families up so that they can build success. We cannot rip out the scaffolding and claw back what families are counting on and call that a plan to build.

I understand the impatience. After this many years and decades of building too little, Canadians have every right to be impatient, but impatience is not a reason to stop building and tear out the scaffolding. It is a reason to build faster. A family having a tough time does not need a politician to name their fear back to them, only louder. They have lived that fear. They do not need it performed as political theatre. The young person wondering if there is room for their future in this country does not need another performance of outrage from the members opposite, which has, sadly, become the only thing they seem to know how to do. Young people need us to build something worthy of their trust, and that is what our government has chosen to do.

In times of crisis and in times of difficulty, Canadians expect us to come together and build big things. They expect us to put aside pettiness and all of the things we cannot do to focus on the things we can and should do. They expect us to show up with solutions.

All of us who have kids know that when we have difficult conversations with them, a temper tantrum is not the way to a solution. Resolution comes through doing things together and showing by example. The Conservatives would have us believe that by ripping up the paper, tossing our toys and walking away, we are somehow going to build a stronger economy. That is not how economies are built. They are built by people who are prepared to invest in this country, which we are seeing now in record numbers. We are seeing that through workers who are prepared to be retrained today for the jobs of the future. That is what we are seeing. It comes with governments that are prepared to match the ambition Canadians have with what they need, which are the resources and the support to be able to get to those places.

Danielle Smith talked about how working with this Prime Minister is a joy. David Eby talked about how working with this government is a joy. I am really curious to know how provincial governments, from Wab Kinew's and David Eby's to Doug Ford's and Danielle Smith's, look at this government and say this is a government they can work with, yet the Conservatives sit there and wonder why their poll numbers keep going down and Canadians refuse to return them to office. It is because premiers of all parties have recognized that this is a government that is prepared to work hard for Canadians, build things for Canadians and invest in the type of economy that Canadians want to see built in this country for a future their kids can look at and be proud of.

Yes, we all know that times are tough. When times are tough, we work together. We are providing solutions to people to give them the supports they need to get through this period. We are showing them a path to a brighter future with the dollars, supports, commitments and, most importantly, the compassion and hope to be able to deliver on big things. We are doing that. We are backing it up by having the provinces and the private sector working with us.

I encourage the Conservatives to stop the slogans and get to work for Canadians with us.

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK

Mr. Speaker, this is coming from a Liberal government that is completely out of ideas. Here is why.

We let the Liberals have Bill C‑5 because they said it was the thing they needed to get business investment and get things built at speeds we have never seen before in this country. We worked with them to pass it because we agree that Canada needs to get building and start getting things done, yet not a single project from the Major Projects Office has been approved and advanced to any next stage.

The Liberals then turned around and said that is not working. What else can they try? They decided to try a sovereign wealth fund, but they do not have any money to put into it, so they are going to borrow against it. They are going to use debt to finance it. It is going to cost Canadians $750 million a year just in debt service charges for their so-called sovereign wealth fund. It is going to be a debt fund. On top of that, they figured out that that is not going to work either, so now they are going to have consultations to figure out how to speed things up.

The government is clueless. It has no idea. Why does it not pass the sovereignty act that the Conservatives proposed to get projects built?

Opposition Motion—Economic PoliciesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Liberal

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure exactly what the question was. It sounded yet again like a litany of complaints and no new ideas, which is exactly what the opposition is devoid of.

Perhaps I could tell them something they might be hopeful about. In my province of British Columbia, there are now four projects at the Major Projects Office. I understand that the Government of Alberta is looking forward to putting forward a proposition to be able to get energy resources to tidewater. It seems that the provinces, the country and the private sector are working together to ensure that we are building things.

I understand the impatience on the other side. After all, the bill was passed less than a year ago. However, they somehow expect mines to spring out of the ground, mills to be built overnight and pipelines to randomly show up. People who have actually built things know that is not how things get done in this country, and it is not how we build real, resilient infrastructure.