Debates of June 2nd, 2026

Opposition Motion—Economic Policies

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question about the school food program. We have school food programs in Saskatchewan for kids who come to school hungry. I think it is really important.

However, the government committed $216.6 million annually to the food program and is making it permanent. An additional 400,000 children will benefit from this commitment every year. There are 5.5 million students in school right now and 3.5 million are in elementary. With the money the government is giving, it works out to $2.70 per day per child. How is that caring for children? Why does the government not give the money back to the parents through a proper economy and let them feed their own kids?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I was about to give a compliment after the member made reference to the Saskatchewan program. One has to remember that this is not for all children in school. It is for the youngest of children. Provinces and stakeholders have been widely supportive of the program. What I liked about her question was that she acknowledged it is a good program in the province of Saskatchewan. That is what she implied.

I would suggest it is a good program for the 400,000-plus children nationwide. I have been a parliamentarian since 1988, and I can tell the member opposite that from virtually day one, I have heard about the issue of education and how important education is to our society. Part of that is that a child cannot learn on an empty stomach, which is why it is so important for the government to have established a national program by demonstrating leadership on the issue.

Hopefully other provinces and so forth will be able to possibly grow the program, but at least we are making a very strong and positive statement. The Conservatives should reverse their position.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Calgary Centre.

I rise today because Canadians deserve a government that lives in the real economy, not in Liberal talking points. The facts are now impossible to deny: Canada has entered a recession. Canada's economy has contracted in two consecutive quarters. It has shrunk in three of the last four quarters. Business investment has fallen for a fifth straight quarter, and household savings have fallen to their lowest level in years. Business and capital investment has also fallen by 0.7%.

However, on Friday, a Liberal stood in the House and said, not once but twice, “let us be clear: Canada is not in a recession.” That is not economic leadership. That is economic denial.

Canadians do not need another lecture from the Liberals about projections, models, forecasts or fine words. They need reality. They see reality every time they open their credit card bills. They see it every time they go to the grocery store. They see it every time they check their savings accounts, and they see it every time their paycheques run out.

The Liberal Prime Minister likes to remind Canadians that he is an economist. He likes to quote projections. He likes to hold signing ceremonies. He likes the language of global summits, high finance, transition plans, industrial strategies and bureaucratic frameworks, but Canadians live in reality, and the reality is this: The Liberal Prime Minister is the only one in the G7 who has taken his economy into recession.

Every other G7 country is facing tariffs. Every other G7 country is facing global uncertainty. Every other G7 country is operating in the same world economy, but only Canada, under the Liberal Prime Minister, is in recession. That means this is not simply a global recession due to global factors. It is not simply a tariff recession. It is not simply an outside shock. This is a homegrown made-by-Liberals recession.

Let us start with a simple economics lesson. Growth comes from work, investment, productivity, innovation and capital formation. A country becomes richer when workers become more productive, when businesses invest in machinery and technology, when entrepreneurs take risks, when capital stays in or is attracted to the country, and when government policy rewards production and innovation instead of punishing it.

Over the last 11 years, the Liberals have done the opposite. They increased the industrial carbon tax. They layered on antidevelopment laws. They buried our resource sector in red tape. They chased away investment, domestically and abroad. They created new Liberal bureaucracies staffed by Liberal insiders, new Liberal slush funds that benefited Liberal friends, new bloated programs and new political photo ops. They even doubled Justin Trudeau's deficit and told Canadians it was all an investment.

In capital markets, there is a simple rule: Capital goes where it is welcome and stays where it is rewarded. Under these Liberals, capital is not being rewarded in Canada. It is being regulated, taxed, delayed, blocked and politicized. That is why business investment is falling. That is why major projects cannot get built. That is why Canadian productivity is weak. That is why dollars that should be building Canadian mines, energy projects, factories, homes, ports, pipelines and technology are leaving the country.

Since the Liberal Prime Minister took office, $109.3 billion in investment has left Canada, while only $88.4 billion has returned. That is a net loss of $20 billion. That is not a rounding error. That is lost opportunity, lost jobs, lost paycheques, lost productivity and lost national leverage. Canadian households now carry the highest debt in the G7, the least affordable housing in the G7, the highest food inflation in the G7, the lowest investment per worker in the G7, the second-lowest productivity in the G7 and the second-highest unemployment in the G7, and now Canadians are paying the price for this Liberal failure.

Canada has lost 112,300 jobs in just three months. There are 45,800 more Canadians who are jobless now than when the Liberal Prime Minister took office a year ago. There are now three unemployed Canadians for every job vacancy. The promise of a better future is being replaced by the fear of falling behind. That is what happens when governments forget the basic lessons of economics.

When we tax production and innovation, we get less production and innovation. When we punish investment and capital, we get less investment and capital. When we make it harder to build, fewer things get built. When government consumes more of the economy, families and businesses are left with a smaller part of the pie. That is not complicated; it is basic economics, but after 11 years of Liberal economic policies, Canada has become a case study in how a rich country can make itself poor.

The Liberals inherited one of the world's most resource-rich, highly educated and stable democratic economies. They inherited a country rich with energy, minerals, farmland, ports, universities, entrepreneurs and workers who want nothing more than to build a good life. They spent 11 years vandalizing this country by making it harder to work, harder to build, harder to invest, harder to hire, harder to buy a home and harder to feed a family, and now the consequences of this Liberal economic vandalism are being felt everywhere.

Food Banks Canada's 2026 poverty report card found that one in four Canadians is experiencing food insecurity and that food bank usage has more than doubled since 2019; one in 10 of greater Toronto area residents now relies on food banks. In 2025, food banks in the GTA saw a record 4.1 million visits, which is up 340% since 2019. Food bank visits have doubled since 2020. One person in five now visiting a food banks is employed, so a job is no longer enough to guarantee stability. That is an indictment of the Liberal government's economic vandalism.

That is what this homegrown made-by-Liberals recession looks like. It looks like empty fridges, empty grocery baskets and empty bank accounts. It looks like parents skipping meals so children can eat. It looks like workers doing everything right, but still falling behind.

The Liberal Prime Minister and his state-sponsored Liberal media machine may call it technical, but there is nothing technical about a quarter of Canadians being unable to adequately feed themselves. There is nothing technical about a young family paying double the rent they would have paid a decade ago. In 2015, rent for a one-bedroom unit in major Canadian cities was about $970 a month. Today, it is about $1,850.

That is not a technicality. That is a generation locked out of independence. There is nothing technical about housing costs. In November 2015, the typical housing cost in Canada was $435,000. Today, it costs $659,000, so it is up 51%. In 2015, it took 39% of median pre-tax household income to own a home. Today, it takes 52.4%, and that does not even account for housing units having smaller square footage today than they did in the past.

Every leading economic indicator is flashing. That is not prosperity. That is a decline managed by Liberal press releases. In public finance, Liberal deficits matter because they have consequences. A deficit is tomorrow's tax bill with interest. It is a claim on future wages due to higher inflation. It is a transfer from young Canadians, working families and seniors to fund today's Liberal ideological vanity projects.

The Liberal Prime Minister is expected to increase our federal debt to nearly $1.63 trillion by 2031. That is $1 trillion more than when the Liberals took power. Canadians are expected to pay $58.3 billion per year just to service the interest on that debt, which is more than what the Liberals collect on the GST and what the federal government pays provinces for health care. While Canadians were tightening their belts, the Liberal government was loosening its own. While families were cutting back, the Liberals were spending more. While small businesses were watching every dollar, the Liberals were expanding government and bureaucracy.

The Liberals wonder why inflation became embedded, why affordability collapsed and why household balance sheets are breaking. Canada now has the highest household debt-to-disposable income ratio in the G7. That is according to Statistics Canada. That means Canadian families are more exposed, more leveraged and more vulnerable when interest rates rise, when household costs increase or when their jobs disappear.

Equifax has reported severe stress in household credit. More than 1.5 million Canadians missed a credit payment in the fourth quarter of 2025. Mortgage delinquencies are up 32%. Consumer insolvencies are up 19%. The financial stability is gone for too many households. This is where economics and finance meet real life. When Liberal governments run inflation deficits, it pushes costs into the economy. When inflation rises, interest rates rise. When interest rates rise, households get squeezed. When households get squeezed, consumer spending slows. When consumer spending slows, businesses need to pull back net new investment. When businesses pull back, jobs disappear and productivity tanks.

That is how a homegrown Liberal recession is made. It is the chain reaction of disastrous Liberal policies. The Liberals taxed energy and made everything that is moved by truck, train, ship and tractor more expensive. They blocked development and weakened the investment case for Canada. They ran deficits that fed inflation. They created uncertainty with endless rules, reviews, delays and political favouritism. They expanded bureaucracy instead of productivity.

Then when the bill came due, the Liberals blamed global factors, but the world did not pass Liberal antidevelopment laws in Canada. The world did not impose Liberal carbon taxes on Canadians. The world did not double Justin Trudeau's Liberal deficit. The world did not create Liberal slush funds for connected Liberal insiders. The world did not chase away Canadian investment. The world did not tell the Liberal government to put politics ahead of everyday Canadians. The Liberals here in Canada did all of that.

Liberal excuses do not create growth. Liberal speeches do not create growth. Liberal signing ceremonies do not create growth. Liberal Party slogans do not create growth. Growth comes from workers, builders, farmers, miners, manufacturers, entrepreneurs, innovators and families that are allowed to keep more of what they earn and build more of what this country needs. That is why Conservatives are calling on the Liberal Prime Minister to reverse the policies that created this homegrown made-by-Liberals recession. That means ending inflationary spending and Liberal credit card deficits, repealing Liberal antidevelopment laws, scrapping uncompetitive Liberal red tape and stopping the creation of new Liberal bureaucracies and slush funds for Liberal insiders. We need to get projects built, bring investment home, reward work, restore productivity and put money back in the pockets of Canadians.

Canada does not need managed decline. Canada does not need another Liberal lecture. Canada does not need another glossy strategy document written by Liberal consultants and announced at a podium. Canada needs a government that understands the economy is not built in Ottawa boardrooms. It is built by Canadians who get up every morning, go to work, take risks, pay taxes, raise families and keep this country moving. They have done their part. Now it is time for the government to let Canadians build again, let Canadians work again, let Canadians invest again and let Canadians hope again. That is how we reverse this Liberal recession.

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

Mr. Speaker, maybe I can help the member. If we look at foreign direct investment per capita, Canada is number one in the G7 countries. Arguably, it would be in the top three worldwide. People living abroad deciding to invest in Canada, I would suggest, is a very good indication of why we are going to have the second-best growth in the G7 this year. That is what is being projected.

The Conservative Party wants to deny that in favour of consistently being negative about Canada. That is all they do.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is another example of a Liberal Party mouthpiece laundering their disinformation here in Canada.

The Liberals like to accuse Conservatives of cherry-picking information, but that is exactly what they are doing. They are cherry-picking statistics here. The truth is that $109 billion of investment has left Canada, while only $88 billion was attracted. That is a net loss of $20 billion. The Liberals can brag about foreign direct investment, but more money is leaving Canada at a faster pace. About a trillion dollars has been lost since the Liberals took power. Those are the facts. Liberals need to live in reality. Canadians do not live in Liberal speeches.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to talk about these fancy big things. It is a complete disconnect from the reality we see.

Food banks have 2.2 million people visiting them every month. In Richmond Hill, a municipality that the hon. member and I have the huge honour of sharing the responsibility of representing in this House, the Richmond Hill Community Food Bank has record numbers of visitors.

I wonder if the member can tell us what he is hearing in the community about the fact that Canada is not number one, not number two and not number three, but in fact the very last of all G7 countries in terms of food affordability.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member and I have both visited the Richmond Hill Community Food Bank, and have seen the conditions that everyday Canadians in Richmond Hill are facing.

The facts prove what we are seeing on the ground. Canadian households now carry the highest debt in the G7. We have the least affordable housing in the G7, the highest food inflation in the G7, the lowest investment per worker in the G7, the second-lowest productivity in the G7 and the second-highest unemployment in the G7.

It really pains me to see that we live in a G7 country with food banks that are busting through the seams with people lining up, and the food banks are running out of food. That is the Canada that this Liberal government has delivered after 11 years.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am glad my colleague talked about food banks, because Food Banks Canada is here on the Hill today.

Food Banks Canada made it clear, and actually warned us, that our employment insurance system no longer reflects the reality of work in Canada. This is impacting people. More Canadians are working multiple part-time jobs, contract positions and gig work. Yet, they are paying into a system that often denies them support when they need it most. It highlighted that while food bank use continues to reach record levels and families struggle with the rising cost of living, millions of workers are being left behind by an outdated EI system designed for a workplace that no longer exists.

Do the Conservatives and my colleague agree with Food Banks Canada in their call for comprehensive EI reform so that gig workers, part-time workers and precarious workers can actually access the benefits that they pay for?

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

Mr. Speaker, one way we could bring immediate relief on food price inflation is by stopping the crazy Liberal inflationary spending and by scrapping the food taxes like the industrial carbon tax, the package tax and the fuel standards tax that the Liberals keep piling on Canadians, day in and day out.

Conservatives proposed a motion to scrap those taxes. The Liberals called them imaginary and voted down our motion. It is shameful. The Liberals are not living in reality. They are living in press releases. Canadians are watching their credit card bills, their bank statements and their mortgage statements. That is the reality that Canadians are living in.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak about an economic matter in the House of Commons today again.

Before I actually get into my speech, I want to talk about the broader terms we are talking about here. We are talking about what a recession is. Of course, there is a technical definition of a recession, but the real indication is usually in the rearview mirror. It is an indication that there has been a significant decline in economic activity that has spread across the economy and has lasted more than a few months. A wide range of data go into that, including GDP decline, which we have had and jobs decline, which we have. We are now at a 6.9% rate of unemployment. Other indications include incomes going down, which is clearly the case in Canada; production going down, so manufacturing and all these other industries that are actually declining in Canada at this point in time; and an inverted yield curve, which we had in 2023 and is usually an indicator that down the road we will enter a recession. All of these indicators are here right now, so we are looking at where we are going to be.

There is falling consumer confidence. Once people are losing their jobs and are out of work, we are going to see them participating less in the economy. That makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy because they pull in their spending. They decide to forgo the expenses that would lead us to where we need to go as an economy.

Rising bankruptcies are an indicator. Let us look at the debts that Canadians have right now. There is a significant amount of debt. We are the most indebted country in the G7. There are a whole bunch of statistics here. I know they are just statistics when we talk about numbers. They are not just statistics to real people who are losing their houses and are having to refinance their mortgage at higher rates. These are pain points that people are feeling across Canada and that we have to make sure that we are looking at rather effectively.

Let us think about our unemployment rate now. It was 6.9% this last month. When we had what is called a technical recession in the rearview mirror in 2015, the unemployment rate was 7%. That is 7% versus 6.9%. We are not far off from an unemployment indicator that would be severe for this country.

To get down to the real pain points here, we have half a million former students in Canada who are still unemployed and who do not have the jobs that they trained for in their educational institutions. These are real lives. They are real contributions that people are trying to make to our economy that are not being fulfilled right now. We need to move in that direction.

Payrolls are down, but let us think about where they have gone. Since 2023, we have 300,000 more public sector employees and what we call MUSH employees, municipalities, universities, schools and hospitals, and there is less private sector employment. That is a problem in an economy running a huge deficit, and we note that the current government is not shy about running higher deficits. That is what is contributing to inflation and what is going to contribute to the fact that we are going to have economic pain here going forward and we need to get ahead of that as quickly as possible.

GDP is going down. Labour productivity is not improving.

I want to talk about this motion today in support of Canadians who are increasingly asking a very simple question: Why is it getting harder to get ahead in this country? The debate is not just about G7 rankings. It is great to make sure we compare ourselves to other economies, but it is about whether Canadians feel progress in their daily lives.

In my riding of Calgary Centre and across the country, people are working hard, doing everything right and still finding themselves falling behind. That should concern every member of this House. The motion before us reflects a troubling pattern. Canada is underperforming relative to its peers. Growth is weak. Household debt is high. The unemployment rate is rising faster than in comparable economies. This did not happen overnight and it did not happen by accident. Choices have been made all the way along that have caused us to be exactly where we are right now.

For years, there were warning signs. Economists raised concerns about persistent deficits during periods of economic growth. My Conservative colleagues and I on this side of the House spoke about it repeatedly here. The Liberal government was told that continued spending without corresponding productivity gains would eventually create inflationary pressure. Those warnings were dismissed. We saw early signs of declining business investments, particularly in key sectors like energy. We saw capital beginning to leave the country. Those signals were ignored by the Liberal government.

We told the Liberal government that global demand for Canadian energy would remain strong, and it has, but instead of positioning Canada to meet that demand, the Liberals layered on uncertainty and delay through job-killing policies, like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, that told investors loud and clear to take their capital somewhere else, and that is exactly what they did, leaving Canadian workers and communities behind. Again, the warning signs were there, even on productivity.

Long before today, experts pointed out that Canada was falling behind our peers: less investment per worker, slower output growth and weak gains in competitiveness. None of this is new. The real concern is that these warning signs were not only ignored then; in many cases, they continue to be ignored now, because instead of correcting course by repealing Bill C-48 and urgently amending the Impact Assessment Act to provide certainty, the government has doubled down on the very approach that caused the problem: more regulation, more delay and more confusion for those looking to invest in Canada.

The signs have been clear for years. Economists warned us that persistent deficits would lead to inflation. Investors pointed out that regulatory uncertainty was driving them to look elsewhere. Workers saw opportunities dwindling in key sectors.

However, the Liberal government did not take these warnings seriously. Today, Canadians are paying the price. It is time to acknowledge these mistakes and change course to restore the conditions necessary for Canadians to succeed.

The consequences of these choices are now showing up in the daily lives of Canadians. Household debt has reached historic highs, not because Canadians are reckless, but because many have had to rely on credit to maintain their standard of living. At the same time, inflation drove up interest rates, and now families are facing the combined pressure of higher borrowing costs and higher everyday expenses. I hear it constantly. People who felt financially stable just a few years ago are now reassessing everything, from major investments to everyday spending. This is not abstract. This is real, and it is widespread.

Nowhere is the gap between potential and performance more obvious than in Canada's energy sector. We are one of the most resource-rich countries in the world. We have the expertise, the workforce and the environmental standards to be a global leader, and yet, at a time when the world was actively seeking secure, democratic sources of energy, Canada failed to step forward. That was a moment of opportunity, and we missed it. In Calgary, the consequences are clear. Investment decisions are delayed, projects face prolonged uncertainty and the new memorandum of understanding does very little to solve that problem.

Capital looks for more predictable environments. This is not because the resources are not in Canada. It is not because the talent is not in Canada. It is because the policy framework has not kept pace with reality. The world continues to need energy, and Canada should be part of that solution, responsibly, sustainably and competitively. This leads to a broader issue: productivity and investment.

Canada is falling behind. We are attracting less capital per worker than our closest peers. We are seeing weaker productivity growth, and over time, that erodes living standards. When investment slows, everything slows: job creation, wage growth and economic mobility. Investors are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for clarity, clear rules, predictable timelines and confidence that Canada is a place where long-term investment is welcome.

Today's motion calls for a plan, and rightly so. A credible plan must start with recognizing how we got here. Then it must focus on restoring the fiscal discipline to reduce inflationary pressures and rebuild economic confidence; re-establishing Canada as a destination for investment through clear, stable and competitive policies; and embracing a realistic approach to energy, one that supports both economic growth and environmental progress without undermining either, because growth is not accidental. It is the real result of consistent, coherent choices over time.

Canada has everything it needs to succeed, the resources, the talent, the entrepreneurial spirit, but potential is not enough. Without the right policies, opportunity is lost.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate some of the comments the member has put on the record.

I think in terms of the prairie provinces and the province of British Columbia. If we take a look at the Prime Minister and the government as a whole, working with the other jurisdictions, I believe we can see that there is a great sense of collaboration. People out west are appreciative. They see the collaboration that is taking place. There is a very strong sense of optimism, whether it is in resource development or in many other common interests that we have in western Canada and even going up north.

I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts in regard to the collaboration that is taking place today and has taken place over the last number of months, which is really leading to a great deal of optimism out west.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is a memorandum of understanding that some provincial governments say is a change in direction in the Liberal government but a change in direction on paper only. When we actually analyze that paper, as many of us have, we see that those changes in direction are not clear enough to actually indicate that people want to invest here. Ask the private sector entities that are impacted by those announcements and those words on paper that the government has put forward. It is still not committing capital. The reason it is not is that there is no clarity about the outcome for the process they have to go through.

Getting infrastructure built in Canada requires an onerous process in which the companies involved, large companies, have to spend more time, resources and money going through the process than they actually have to spend putting the infrastructure in place. That has to change. The process cannot be the only thing that matters. We have to get things built in this country again.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook—Brant North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that was an excellent speech. Eleven years ago, Canada had the best-performing economy in the G7 and the OECD. After 11 years of the Liberals and their disastrous policies, we are the only G7 country in recession, and we have the lowest private sector investment of any economy in the OECD.

What would Conservatives do to close the gap the member talked about, in terms of the immense resource wealth we have, and the smart people, yet poor results?

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that actually was an excellent question, because people ask me all the time, “What would you do differently?” I think we need to be very clear. We would make sure that those rules are very clear, unlike the muddled rules we keep coming up with where we are talking out of one side of our mouth to this group of people and the other side of our mouth to another group of people.

There will be clarity about how we get through process quickly and sustainably in Canada. That is something every investor is looking for. What is the process? How long will it take? When can they start building and get a return on their investment? That has to be clear to all investors, all proponents, in getting things done in Canada once again.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of respect for my colleague the member for Calgary Centre, despite our differences. I also have respect for my colleague the member for Calgary Confederation, who on May 27, 2025, in the House said, “We will ensure the future sustainability of programs that have already saved families thousands of dollars a year. This includes child care and pharmacare.”

I am going to talk about pharmacare, because right now in Alberta there is not a pharmacare plan, something we fought really hard for as New Democrats. Does my colleague think that people in Alberta's not having diabetes medicine or birth control is the responsibility, or blame, of his premier, Danielle Smith, or is it the Prime Minister's fault?

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from my colleague. I know that Alberta, frankly, has a very robust social welfare system, the envy of many provinces across the country. Whether those funds come from the federal government or the provincial government, they are stacked and actually represent a level of sustenance across the economy that people in need actually require. That includes money for housing, for health and for all the things we look at in a social system, where people need to have a basic life and make sure they are taken care of. That is part of governing in this country: making sure we look after the people who do not have the ability to quite look after themselves and that we are there for them in that respect.

Layering on a federal program on top of provincial programs is no way to approach federalism in Canada. That is something we want to make sure of: that we give the province the ability to solve this at its level when it has that jurisdiction to take care of.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, Foreign Affairs; the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni, Dental Care.

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver—Capilano, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to provide some final words after almost 11 years in this place. I want to begin by acknowledging my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, as well as the many dedicated public servants and staffers with whom I have had the privilege to work during my time here.

While I know there are some people in all parties who cannot get past the, at times, partisan nature of politics, I have made many friends across the aisle during my time here, folks who are here to serve their constituents, their province and their country but who can also be open to speaking to and even having fun with people of differing perspectives. Honestly, the fact that many of us actually like each other as people across the aisle is something that Canadians should see more often.

I fully recognize that many people have devoted a significant part of their professional lives to building a better Canada and a better world.

All members of the chamber have been fortunate to have been allowed to play a role in shaping public policy in this country and internationally. It is a privilege that very few folks enjoy.

Before getting into policy issues, I want to point out that, in the House, we all give a lot, but we also receive a lot.

One of the things I am particularly grateful for is having had the opportunity to learn Canada's other official language. Although my French is far from perfect, this skill I have acquired here is a great gift.

When I left the private sector to run for office, many people in the business community thought I was mad, but it has been the most rewarding experience of my life. As an MP and as a minister at DFO, at Environment Canada and at Natural Resources Canada, I have often said I had truly the best job in Canada. As MPs, we know well that the impact we can have on constituents' lives can at times be profound, but it can also be profoundly rewarding.

I do not typically like to use the word “proud”, as the people who have worked with me know, but today I will. Over nearly 11 years in government, I am proud of several things that I, my team and departments, and government as a whole, helped to accomplish.

A few of the highlights include developing Canada's strengthened climate plan, the healthy environment and healthy economy, the first plan in Canadian history to show in detail not only how we could achieve a climate target but how we could exceed one; launching Canada's first critical minerals strategy and the investment tax credit regime to advance clean energy development; establishing what I believe will be transformational in this country, the indigenous loan guarantee program; catalyzing the full modernization of Canada's aging Coast Guard fleet; creating the B.C. salmon restoration and innovation fund to address the decline of wild Pacific salmon, which is a critical issue in British Columbia; and expanding marine protected areas from 1% to over 14% during my time as minister of fisheries.

Every member of the House will have heard many times people asking why they should engage in the political process, often saying that individuals cannot make a difference. That attitude is particularly prominent these days with young people. However, I would say, in my experience, that this is simply not true. I entered politics over a decade ago to tackle climate change in a way that creates economic opportunity and is not simply about sacrifice. Over that time, working alongside colleagues, I have had the chance to make meaningful and, I believe, lasting contributions to climate policy that builds a strong future economy.

Individuals can make a difference through their words and through their actions. That is a message I often share with young people, whether in schools, through my youth council or in communities across the country, many of whom presently feel the system does not work for them. On the climate issue that brought me into politics, while today's geopolitical climate may suggest that progress has slowed, I remain optimistic that Canada, Europe and the world will meet this challenge.

Climate change is not going away. It is a scientific reality, with human and economic impacts that are growing every year.

Climate change is a major challenge, but addressing it and building a strong economy for the future can and indeed must go hand in hand. Looking at actual global trends rather than simply rhetoric, it is clear that the world is moving to a lower-carbon future and that many countries, China in particular, have explicit economic strategies to accelerate the energy transition.

Progress is being made, albeit more slowly than science suggests we need. Growth in energy-related CO2 emissions is continuing to decouple from global economic growth. Very importantly, climate progress is, increasingly, not simply being driven by government policy. It is being driven by technology. Simply put, many low-carbon energy technologies are now cheaper and often much better than conventional alternatives, and this is something we should all celebrate. Climate change and its impacts are a matter of science, not politics. How we choose to respond remains a fundamentally political decision, one that requires foresight, thoughtfulness and courage.

The past 11 years have been enormously rewarding, and I am grateful for the opportunity to continue serving this country in a new capacity, as the Prime Minister has asked me to take on the role of Canada's ambassador to the European Union.

I accepted this position for the same reason I entered politics: a commitment to Canada and a belief that this is where I can make the greatest contribution right now.

The Prime Minister has an ambitious vision for what this partnership can become. My role will be to help implement that vision and ensure that it delivers concrete results for all parties.

I love this country more than I can fully express. Canada is the best country in the world, not because we are perfect but because we face our flaws and choose again and again to do better. Ours is a story of resilience, of expanding rights and of building a more inclusive and just society. Whether that story continues is up to us and our willingness to stand up for what we believe in, defend democracy, advance reconciliation, confront climate change and build an economy that works for everyone.

Serving as a member of Parliament and a minister has been the privilege of my life. Serving in my new role will be a different kind of privilege, one that I approach with the same sense of duty and determination.

I will conclude by waxing a bit philosophical. I think most of my staff who are here will probably find that funny. I believe we are capable as a species of enlightened self-interest. In this regard, acting on climate change is firmly in our collective self-interest. However, I also believe that many of us are also very much capable of altruism, of thinking not only about how building a better community or helping those less fortunate may benefit us in the longer term but actually also about how we are morally obligated in the direction of social justice. To all people in and outside the House, I say that we can indeed work to build a better and more just world if only we have the courage and the will to try.

In this vein, I will conclude by quoting the words of William Blake, taken from his poem Jerusalem. I freely admit that I took these lines from the conclusion of speeches by the great Tommy Douglas. As a Saskatchewanian originally, and as someone who actually watched him in person and met him as a young person, I think Tommy would think that is just fine. These lines, I think, capture the essence of a commitment to community and to public service, which is, I believe, about striving each and every day to make this country and this world a better place in which to live.

Blake wrote:

I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand:
Till we have built Jerusalem,
In Englands green & pleasant Land.

It has been a pleasure and an honour to get to know and work with all of my colleagues.

I look forward to seeing many of them in Brussels.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to note the departure of the hon. member for North Vancouver—Capilano, who will be leaving this place to serve Canada abroad in a new capacity.

The member and I have spent a good deal of time on opposite sides of some very important debates, such as on net-zero legislation, the 2 billion trees initiative and broader Conservative concerns about the government's environmental approach. Those disagreements were real. I stand by them, just as I am sure the hon. member does. While most of those exchanges were during his time as the minister of the environment and minister of natural resources, I also want to thank him for his service as the minister of fisheries. I know he cared very much in that role about salmon policy, and it is always welcome, as I have said many times, to have another British Columbian voice in Ottawa, particularly one in a position of authority.

In fact, when it comes to the debates we had, I suspect we may both continue to believe we were on the right side of those debates. Perhaps the only fair way we can resolve that is to compare notes in the years ahead, say, in 2030, and maybe again in 2050, when the results of those policies are clear.

What is worth noting is that even through those disagreements, we never lost the ability to have a conversation. Whether it was in the House, at committee, at the parliamentary gym or even when we found ourselves seated next to each other on a long flight, there was always professionalism and mutual respect.

As a fellow British Columbian, I can attest to the travel demands that come with representing a riding on the west coast. It is not always an easy schedule. I recall mentioning to the member at the gym that perhaps in his new role, he might finally find himself ahead of events happening in Ottawa rather than living life feeling three hours behind.

I recall one moment during COVID at committee when I yielded my time, and of course, members would know that the opposition never has tricks for ministers when they show up at committee. When I yielded my time to the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands to question the minister on his net-zero bill, in that instant, a minister's staffer sprung, or I should say flung, into action, diving onto the desk, pulling one book out and somehow switching it with a completely different book. It was a small moment, but it allowed the minister to switch the answers fitting the perspective of a Conservative to that of a Green member of Parliament.

It may have been a small moment, but it reflected not only the preparation but also the strength of the people we count on. Moments like this remind us that none of us do this work alone. We often rely on dedicated staff who work behind the scenes, often under pressure, to help us perform our duties as elected officials as ably as possible. They may not often be recognized, but they should be, and we should thank them not just today but, I believe, every day.

There comes a time when many who serve here look for new ways to continue contributing. Canadians have been well served by former parliamentarians at the federal and provincial levels who have stepped into roles abroad. It was Prime Minister Harper who began appointing experienced political leaders such as Gary Doer, followed by Gordon Campbell. Prime Minister Trudeau continued this practice, with Stéphane Dion and John Horgan of British Columbia.

These individuals said yes to continuing to serve and to putting their years of insight and experience to work for Canada in a new way. I suspect having a prime minister make that personal call helps in one's decision-making. I would just point out before I finish that there are many experienced parliamentarians who have since left active political life whose insight and perspective could likewise be drawn upon.

On that basis, I wish the hon. member for North Vancouver—Capilano well. While I have said we have disagreed, I respect his willingness to serve and have no doubt he will continue to do so in his next role.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is such a pleasure today to be able to speak about the remarkable career of the member for North Vancouver—Capilano.

I was surprised today when I looked up information about my colleague to try to find things I did not know about him. We share a similar background in political science and philosophy. Maybe that is why we get along so well. As members know, my colleague was the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, and Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. That is how we got to know each other. What I did not know was that, in the 1990s, he was part of Roy Romanow's team as a constitutional negotiator and an expert in federal-provincial relations. For a Quebecker, knowing Roy Romanow is not a good thing. However, let us not hold it against anyone. I got to know the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie in the private sector. That happens to us all.

I especially want to highlight the fact that he has been a non-partisan parliamentarian. Debates in the House of Commons can often be heated. With the exception of his responses regarding the carbon tax, my friend, the member for North Vancouver—Capilano, generally responded candidly to the questions put to him. I also observed that non-partisanship in the work we did with him. It is thanks to him that we were able to add phosphate to the list of critical minerals. That was essential for my region. There was also the program to build greener homes, which faced some challenges. He was always very helpful and always open to assisting colleagues, even those on the opposition side. The two billion trees program did not go as smoothly, but he always defended it adroitly. I believe he can be proud of everything he has done in defence of the environment. He has been a resource for many people in various groups. Even when attempts were made to undermine his credibility, it was quite difficult to do so, which suggests that the member for North Vancouver—Capilano had a strong reputation among environmental groups. I have often wondered, when people talk about zero-emission vehicles, whether anyone actually owns a hydrogen-powered vehicle. The member for North Vancouver—Capilano is the only person I know in Canada who does.

I would also like to thank him for a trip we took to Berlin, where we were able to meet with representatives from Siemens. The problem was that people at Siemens thought I was part of the government, so they felt free to speak frankly to the member for North Vancouver—Capilano about what they thought of a hydrogen strategy involving carbon capture and storage. At that moment, even though it was not the answer they were expecting, the member did not lose his composure. It was a demonstration of true non-partisanship and a certain degree of trust. I sincerely thank him for that.

Earlier, in his speech, he talked about how grateful he is that he learned French. He managed to do that during his time in office. I think that is very much to his credit, and I want to share a brief story. On one occasion, the member for North Vancouver—Capilano asked his assistant why I was talking to him in English when I always spoke to the member in French. I must admit that this is a sign of respect for a francophone. I will explain to him why I prefer to speak to a minister in French. The reason is that, often, when someone is not speaking in their mother tongue, there are small nuances that they do not properly grasp. I will give him an example that he is very familiar with. We were chatting after I found out that he was likely going to be appointed ambassador. I asked him how his wife was taking the news, whether she would be going with him and whether she would be giving up her job. He told me that, yes, she would be going with him because she loves having new adventures. “Having new adventures” has a bit of a different meaning in French. That is why I always speak in my mother tongue. My father had two life mottos. They should be taken with a grain of salt, but my father always told me that I should not trust anyone who does not drink but that I could trust a man who laughs heartily. The member for North Vancouver—Capilano has always had a hearty laugh ever since I have known him. That says a lot about him and shows how friendly and likeable he is.

I will conclude by saying that my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean and I very much hope there is a guest room in Brussels. We are trying to broaden our networks. We have joked a lot about this.

On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I wish him every success in his new role. It will be a pleasure to work alongside him again.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a genuine privilege to pay tribute to the hon. member for North Vancouver—Capilano on behalf of Canada's New Democrats and to wish him well in his upcoming post as Canada's ambassador to the European Union. I was told I had a minute and a half to say what needed to be said. I find myself with a little bit more time, so I am going to use that time because there is much that can be said about this member.

He has always brought intelligence, collegiality and dedication to service to this place. As a cabinet minister with several critical portfolios, he has made significant contributions to our nation. His voracious reading, attention to detail and commitment to hard work are now the stuff of legend. He centred much of his efforts on preparing Canada for a sustainable future. We know that through his efforts, we have made profound progress on salmon conservation and plastic pollution. In fact, the largest investment in Canadian history in salmon preservation was done because of his efforts.

The House, in its wisdom, has already anticipated my next line, which is that I applaud him for his vision and passion in this regard.

As B.C. members of Parliament, I can say for us that we deeply appreciate the positive impact he has had, in particular, on our province and our coasts. I think the very best that can be said about any elected representative is that they made a difference. Well, the hon. member has certainly done that here in spades. We wish him all the best in his new duties, filling a critical role that will benefit greatly from his skills and talents. I know that he will make a difference in Brussels and do Canada proud.

As he does so, I urge him to hearken back to his early days as a Saskatchewan Young New Democrat, an excellent pedigree, and in times of doubt or difficulty, never hesitate to ask, what would Tommy Douglas have done?

I thank the member for his service, and we wish him all the best.

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

Mr. Speaker, to my hon. colleague from North Vancouver—Capilano, it is bittersweet to see him leave this place. The only sweet part is knowing that he will be representing Canada so well as our ambassador to the European Union, a jurisdiction that has not forgotten climate change.

Earlier today, I was meeting with a colleague from the German Greens who serves as a member of the European Parliament. She was describing to me what it was like to work in Brussels and Strasbourg, back and forth, and she thought it was a long trip. I explained what it was like to be a British Columbia member of Parliament in this place. She is from Hanover. The hon. member may run into her someday.

My hon. colleague and friend from North Vancouver—Capilano and I have become friends. I do not think we started out that way, but it was one of my favourite moments in any committee meeting when our hon. colleague gave me his time at the beginning of the environment committee. It was a choice moment, and it does not happen very often, but he did not really need a briefing book either way. I will just say that. He is one of the ministers in this place who are not in need of someone telling them what the facts are or telling them what to say. It would be unnecessary.

In reviewing all the years that he has served in this place, primarily under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as Minister of Fisheries, Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, anyone here will know that we hardly ever crossed paths: in other words, pretty constantly. There is the work that the hon. member did on fisheries, as my hon. friend from Vancouver Kingsway has pointed out, the work to ban single-use plastics to get them out of our oceans, the work, as has been mentioned, for wild salmon, the work on carbon pricing and the work to move to a post-carbon economy.

These lessons and the hard fights that he had must not be lost, so I will say, from the bottom of my heart, “thank you”, and I will say that perhaps his child Max might say that when the member gets to Brussels, he should change Canada's position to make ecocide a crime under the International Criminal Court provisions. That is just something to take away. No one asked me to say that.

Additionally, I would say to the hon. member for North Vancouver—Capilano as he leaves here that we are always in the right to remember one of the greatest Canadian parliamentarians ever, Tommy Douglas. The fact that the hon. member was able to be brought into cabinet to represent Saskatchewan, while a Vancouver MP, is one of those things that we know will define him as a great Canadian to represent Canada to the EU.

I ask him to remember other lines that I recall from William Blake's Jerusalem, which I also love. It is not “my sword sleep in my hand” or about this green land, but remember how William Blake described industry: the “dark Satanic Mills”.

To the hon. member, continue the good work. We look forward to seeing him at home in Canada, and in the meantime I hope to be able to come now and then to Brussels. I thank him so much for his service. There are not enough words to thank him.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I, too, would like to say how pleased I was to work with the minister.

I have always admired his intellect and the fact that he was always approachable whenever we wanted to find out more about an issue related to his department.

I personally wish him every success in representing Canada on the international stage.

The hon. member for Burnaby North—Seymour.

[Terry Beech, Liberal, Burnaby North—Seymour, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member for North Vancouver—Capilano will be deeply and profoundly missed in this House, on the North Shore, in B.C. and across Canada. We were nominated as neighbours within weeks of each other, and for more than 12 years, I have had the pleasure of watching his impact on our community and our country. The only solace I have is that Europe, the world and Canada get to continue to benefit from His Excellency's new position.

He did not do this alone. He is notorious for surrounding himself with the best people, and I thought he might want to take this opportunity to acknowledge some of the great Canadians with whom he has had the opportunity to work over the years.

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver—Capilano, BC]

Mr. Speaker, that is very nice, and it does give me an opportunity to give a few thanks.

I would start by thanking the dedicated public servants who worked with me in various departments, and in particular the deputy ministers, who, honestly, were all excellent folks: Catherine Blewett at Fisheries, Stephen Lucas, John Moffat, Chris Hogan at Environment Canada, J.F. Tremblay, John Hannaford, Mollie Johnson, Michael Vandergrift and Jeff Labonté at Natural Resources Canada. Canada should be very comforted and proud that we have such amazing public servants.

I thank my constituency staff. I often said, no offence to the other members in this place, but they ran one of the best constituency offices in the country, certainly the director, who has been long serving there, Cynthia Bunbury, and the many volunteers in my riding, in particular Duncan Frostick and Kevin Evans, who were great sources of guidance for me.

Of course, I thank the folks who worked in my offices here in Ottawa and the chiefs of staff I have had: Marlo Reynolds, Claire Seaborn, Alexis McIntyre, Kyle Harrietha and a whole range of amazing staff, many of whom have chosen to be here today.

I thank Laura Mitchell, who has been with me for 10 years, and a number of other folks who came with me from North Vancouver. I thank Richard, Kieran, Sandy, who ran all of Atlantic Canada for me very ably, and Erin Flanagan. I hope I am not missing somebody.

I thank Sabrina Kim, who sometimes drove me crazy, but she was one of the best communications directors I had.

It is because of folks like that that we are able to actually do our jobs in this place, and I was very fortunate to have amazingly dedicated, talented people.

Thank you.