Debates of June 8th, 2026

Opposition Motion—The Government's Fiscal Policies

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague from Newfoundland and Labrador on her speech. It was a great speech until she said that she was the alternative solution to the situation, with the usual Conservative Party slogans, using the same proposals that promote oil and gas over natural resources and renewables.

Anyway, I would like to focus on the part of her speech that I liked, the part about the regions that are becoming ghost towns because there is a shortage of long-term employment and development opportunities to encourage young people to move there. It is unacceptable that young families are looking to leave Newfoundland and Labrador. Newfoundlanders should have the chance and the opportunity to make a life for themselves in their home province.

My region is facing some challenges at the moment. The government does not seem to understand the situation, which is jeopardizing our manufacturing sector and for which there is an incredibly easy solution. I would like to hear my colleague talk more about concrete solutions to real problems rather than waving around a magic wand that she thinks would solve everything if a Conservative government were in power.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I would agree with the member. Rural Canada and rural Newfoundland and Labrador have so much untapped potential and opportunity. Newfoundland and Labrador is a natural resource-based economy, but there are so many projects that are caught up in regulatory red tape. There are so many small and medium-sized business owners who have a taxation burden. They also have a regulatory burden that they cannot get out from underneath. This is what fuels rural economies all over Canada, but especially in Newfoundland and Labrador. These are the solutions that Conservatives would bring forward to unleash opportunity in rural Canada and especially in Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's speech really hit home for me, coming from rural B.C. Not many people would call Kelowna rural, but it is just north of me, and it has the highest unemployment rate now in the country, at over 9%. Then that filters down to all the areas around it, including my riding. I am hearing from constituents constantly about exactly what the member talked about. They are having trouble putting food on the table, and it is a real thing. We are not stirring the pot; it is actually a real thing. I am hearing about it in my office constantly. I am seeing it at the food banks.

What is the danger of denying that there is a problem in our country? What is the danger of the Liberals continuing to deny this?

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Mr. Speaker, my mom would often say that in order to fix something, we have to acknowledge that the problem exists. This is exactly the problem we are seeing with our country right now. If we try to deflect with rhetoric and talk about our leader and get all excited, we are not dealing with the actual issues. That is the problem with denying it.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, we all know we are living through one of the most dangerous and divided moments the world has seen in generations. We all know the pressure that is coming toward Canadians is not coming from just one direction, but all directions at once. We know our closest ally and trading partner has imposed tariffs at levels we have not seen in living memory. Wars are being fought in Europe and the Middle East. Supply chains that took decades to build are being fractured in real time. All of this is unfolding against a technological transformation that is defining what work and our economy will look like a decade from now and, indeed, in less than a decade from now.

This is not a normal moment, and most Canadians know it. They feel it at the grocery till and at mortgage renewal. A young person feels it doing the math on a first home. We all understand that. We all understand the concerns and the risks, and we all understand that it is our job to figure out how to make it better.

No honest account of how we got here points to a single villain or a single year. This has taken decades, across governments of every stripe in a country where it has become simply too hard to build, too hard to get major projects off the ground, too hard to keep our best talent, research and companies from leaving to go elsewhere and too hard to turn ideas into industry. These are not partisan accusations. They are an inheritance for every single one of us in the chamber from decades and decades of action.

The question before the House is not whether the moment is hard. We all know it is. The question is what a serious government does about it. What this government has chosen to do is focus relentlessly on what is within our control. We have established a Major Projects Office to make sure that we can get nation-building projects built and that they do not die in a queue. We passed the One Canadian Economy Act to make sure that we tear down the internal trade walls that made it absurdly easier to trade with another country than with the next province over. Our productivity superdeduction gives businesses a reason to invest here and now. Build Canada Homes is already building thousands of homes. Through team Canada strong, we are putting $6 billion behind 100,000 new skilled trade workers, because we cannot build what we approve without the hands to build it.

Here is the part that the members opposite will never mention, because it is not convenient: We are doing this with people, not against them. Premiers of every political stripe, Liberal, Conservative and New Democrat, and even Danielle Smith have found that this government is a partner with whom they can actually work. That is what governing in a time of crisis actually looks like. We put down the partisan cudgel, we pick up the tools and we work together.

This brings me to the motion from the Leader of the Opposition that is before us today, because it was definitely not written in that spirit. It is not an offer to build. It is not an offer to think about how we might work together. It is not even an honest account of where we are. It is, yet again, performative theatre.

I want to take a moment to focus on a single word that is at the centre of it. The motion does not say “a difficult quarter”. It does not say “a slowdown”. It reaches, in the very first line, for the biggest word available: “recession”.

There is a body that all of us have recognized, whose entire job is to decide whether that word applies. It is the C.D. Howe Institute's business cycle council. Trusted by Conservatives and Liberals alike, it is the organization that has effectively been trusted as the organization that determines whether we are, in fact, in a recession, and it has not said that. It is not a Liberal organization. It is not a Liberal press release or a Conservative press release that gets to decide this. It is the council that called the 2008 financial crisis and the council that called the COVID downturn. When the real thing arrives, that council is the one that names it, not politicians.

Three days ago, the council looked at exactly the same data the Leader of the Opposition is brandishing, and it refused to use his word. It found the decline so slight, at a fraction of a single per cent, that it does not even come close to any recession it has ever declared, and it warned in very clear terms that it is precisely this kind of label placed upon it by politicians and stapled onto numbers like these that causes further problems, because it is designed to sound official and frightening.

The country's own referees, the people who called the 2008 recession and the COVID downturn, looked at this and would not go there. The Leader of the Opposition decided that it is his job to go and write a bigger word than theirs into a motion. Let us ask the question that the motion was built to stop anyone from asking: Why?

Why would the Leader of the Opposition reach past the experts, as is custom for him, for the most frightening word he could find? Why does he need a slowdown to be a catastrophe? Why is it valuable for him to cast fear into the hearts of Canadians, who are already facing challenging times, which we all acknowledge? It is because, for him, the catastrophe becomes a permission slip.

A slowdown asks the government to steady the ship and keep building, but a catastrophe is the only thing that could ever justify what this motion actually demands, which is to reverse the policies. We should say what is clearly hiding inside that intention. Reversing the policies means taking away the dental care that seniors are using right now. Taking away child care means telling the parents at Butterfly Kisses, a child care centre in his own riding that has brought fees down for working families, that those working families will no longer be able to access the subsidies that make it possible for children in his riding to access affordable child care. Reversing the policies means taking away the national school food program that feeds children before they sit down to learn.

Whether they are in Carleton or Battle River—Crowfoot, Canadians are asking for the same things. They are asking for dental care, child care and certainty and stability in the government. They are looking for leadership that not only tells them that things will be all right, but shows them a path and takes the action to do so by building consensus.

The Leader of the Opposition wants rubble he can stand in. That is what reversing the policies means once we start performing the word “recession” in pantomime or theatre in this place and start reading the fine print. They cannot rip the floor out from underneath people over a fraction of 1%. They can only do it if they first convince the country, as they are seeking to do, that the house is on fire.

The Leader of the Opposition needs catastrophe. He needs the fire, but not because the data supports it. He does not. He needs it because without it, there is no excuse for what he is selling Canadians. Without it, there is little reason for toxic leadership from his side. That is the real divide in this chamber, and it could not be starker. One side is working to convince Canadians, alongside premiers, Conservatives, Liberals and New Democrats that it is time to work together and build things, and another side is saying the building we are trying to build together is condemned so that no one objects when they start tearing down the walls.

On this side, we are going to keep building. That building is showing up in results where people live and in what they will experience.

In B.C., which is my home province, the merger that created Anglo Teck has planted a new global mining champion headquarters in Vancouver, with thousands of Canadian jobs and billions of dollars in investment secured here at home. That is talent and capital choosing Canada at the very moment when the members opposite insist that Canada is collapsing.

The OECD, which is by no means a Liberal agency, projects that this country will grow the second-fastest in the G7 this year and next—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I must interrupt the member.

It being 6:30 p.m., and today being the last allotted day for the supply period ending June 23, 2026, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the opposition motion.

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I ask for a recorded division.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(18), the division stands deferred until later this day.

Concurrence in Vote 5—Department of National Defence

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

moved:

That Vote 5, in the amount of $17,968,133,395, under Department of National Defence — Capital expenditures, in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2027, be concurred in.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Halifax.

I am thankful for the opportunity to speak about the government's spending priorities for the 2026‑27 fiscal year as set out in the main estimates.

The main estimates outline the funding and resources departments require to deliver the programs and services Canadians rely on. Parliament must authorize these expenditures before the government can legally spend public funds. To further strengthen accountability and scrutiny, parliamentary committees have the opportunity to hear from and question ministers and officials to determine whether proposed spending aligns with key government priorities. Canadians can also see how the government intends to use their tax dollars. The amounts listed in the main estimates are reflected in appropriation acts, also known as supply bills. Once passed, these acts give the government the legal authority to spend.

With respect to main estimates 2026‑27, I would like to point to budget 2025 as the context for these spending requests. As the budget made clear, the government is committed to strong fiscal management. This means spending less on operations so that we can invest more in building Canada strong. Since the budget was tabled in the fall, rather than in the spring, as in previous years, there has been greater opportunity to align the main estimates with budget decisions. As a result, the 2026‑27 main estimates reflect $14.7 billion in new spending announced in budget 2025, including in key areas like defence, infrastructure and housing. Measures that are still under development will be presented through future supplementary estimates.

As I mentioned, making investments in priority areas means that the government is spending less and investing more to build the strongest economy in the G7. As such, the spending outlined in these main estimates also reflects some of the savings resulting from Canada's new government's comprehensive expenditure review. Last year, we made a clear commitment to spend less on government operations so that we can invest more in the workers, businesses and nation-building infrastructure that will grow our economy and strengthen this country. The comprehensive expenditure review launched in July was essential in meeting this commitment to responsible, cost-effective spending that delivers results for Canadians.

The review required federal organizations to bring forward savings proposals to spend less on the day-to-day running of the government. It targeted programs and activities that were not core to their federal mandate, were duplicative or were not aligned with the government's priorities. Organizations also considered ways to work more efficiently, leveraging existing and emerging technologies, like artificial intelligence, where they can make the government more effective and efficient. Some of the results of this review were presented in the budget, and savings of $13 billion annually by 2028‑29 were identified across departments.

This includes bringing the public service back to a sustainable level, including through a reduction in the size of public service by an estimated 16,000 full-time equivalents.

The government understands the scope of the review. That is why the reductions are being managed with fairness and compassion, relying on attrition and voluntary departures to the greatest extent possible. The government remains committed to supporting impacted public servants with compassion and transparency. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank our public servants for their dedication and commitment in delivering services to Canadians.

We are also leveraging all available tools to limit involuntary departures, including the early retirement incentive. The early retirement incentive provides an opportunity for eligible employees to retire without a penalty for early departure. Around 7,000 employees have already applied to the program. The government's departmental plans tabled in March provide more details on the review and how financial resources will be used to achieve planned results.

Before getting into the details of the main estimates, I would like to speak about the financial reporting cycle and why it is so important. I have already mentioned the purpose of the main estimates, but not all funding requirements appear in the main estimates, so the government also introduces supplementary estimates throughout the year. Supplementary estimates may include funding for new initiatives, urgent needs, such as disaster responses, or items that were not ready in time to be included in the main estimates. These documents are tabled at different points throughout the fiscal year: supplementary estimates (A) in the spring, supplementary estimates (B) in the fall and supplementary estimates (C) in the winter, if required.

Taken together, the supplementary estimates and the mains are part of the estimates family of documents. This estimates family of documents also includes departmental plans, which set out priorities of federal organizations, and departmental results reports, which show how departments performed and help Canadians assess how effectively their tax dollars were used.

Another significant document in this fiscal cycle is the public accounts. While the estimates outline planned spending, the public accounts provide the audited, consolidated financial statements of the Government of Canada for each fiscal year ending March 31. They detail how the funds were actually spent and how the revenue was collected.

The government is well aware of how important transparency and accountability are to Canadians. That is why we continue to prioritize the way the estimates are presented. Extensive explanatory documentation is readily accessible online to parliamentarians and Canadians. Online platform tools used for this purpose in GC InfoBase present the main estimates and the supplementary estimates, along with other data related to government finances, people and results.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Leduc—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there was another speech made today, probably a little more watched than this one, from our leader, in Calgary, talking about national unity.

When I look at the financial situation facing Canada today, one of the things I cannot help but think about is how different things would be had pipelines, which were already under way in 2015, been built to completion. Right now, we are in a circumstance where our country is bringing in billions of dollars' worth of oil from countries like Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria, to the east coast, and the regulations at play are not nearly as rigorous for that oil as they are for oil coming from Alberta and Saskatchewan.

I am wondering if the hon. minister thinks that is fair and if he has some thoughts on the impact that has on the Canadian economy.

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, Brampton—Chinguacousy Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as we know, we are going through global instability and global challenges. This is the moment we need to seize.

Our new government, under the leadership of our Prime Minister, one of the greatest prime ministers, is bringing nations together, moving forward to take bold actions and delivering results. It is great to see all levels of government working together, moving on, sharing priorities and building Canada strong.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the fact that the Parliamentary Budget Officer has cast doubt on the government's ability to maintain one of its fiscal anchors, namely its target to reduce the deficit-to-GDP ratio.

She predicts that the deficit will be $6.5 billion higher than projected in the economic update. She does also predict that the debt-to-GDP ratio will fall from 2% to 1.5% by the 2030-31 fiscal year, but she estimates that there is less than a 1% chance that Ottawa will achieve an annual reduction in the deficit-to-GDP ratio.

What are my colleague's thoughts on that?

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, Brampton—Chinguacousy Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the new government is focused on investing in core priorities that matter most to Canadians and taking bold actions. It is because of those actions that we see, as we saw last Friday, a report that almost 90,000 jobs were added to the Canadian labour force, and that unemployment has dropped.

There are measures the government is taking to build the strongest economy in the G7 and to focus on delivering results for Canadians.

[Marilyn Gladu, Liberal, Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am interested to understand how the positive indicators we are starting to see, in terms of the biggest growth in the G7, highest per capita foreign investment and things like this, are going to impact the estimates going forward.

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, Brampton—Chinguacousy Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the main estimates and supplementary estimates, along with other data related to government finances, are published in the expenditure database, a digital tool, which people can consult. This is key to giving parliamentarians and Canadians more information on how public funds are being spent. I encourage my hon. colleagues who have not already done so to consult this great tool.

Main estimates represents a total of $502.8 billion in budgetary spending for 130 organizations to deliver programs and services that Canadians rely on—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Halifax.

[Shannon Miedema, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the global security environment today is volatile and uncertain. We face real challenges, both military and non-military, that demand an equally strong and coordinated response. Canada must be prepared to defend ourselves and our allies.

Our government has announced the most ambitious defence rebuild in a generation. Today, with the 2026-27 main estimates, we are putting the money behind that commitment. I am really pleased to stand in the House to talk about this today, representing my riding of Halifax. Halifax is home to the largest defence base in the country. CFB Halifax, in one form or another, has existed since the 18th century, predating Canada as we know it. The military and our armed forces members are ingrained in our history and are already shaping our future.

Our city is advancing incredible projects for the Canadian Armed Forces. We are building the River class destroyers and we are home to NATO DIANA and the Maritime DISH. As we prepare our next big defence procurement with the new fleet of submarines, there is even more possibility for Halifax.

The government is requesting $50.7 billion for the Department of National Defence. That is $15 billion more than the previous year, or a 42% increase in funding. That includes $5.1 billion in new operating funding, $7.1 billion in capital and $2.3 billion in grants and contributions.

These are not abstract numbers. They represent real capabilities and real investments in real people: the personnel who wear the uniform and defend this country every day.

Last year, Canada hit 2% of GDP on defence for the first time since the fall of the Berlin Wall, half a decade ahead of schedule. Reaching the 2% benchmark is a foundational step in renewing Canada's defence and a clear statement of resolve in a more dangerous world. We are now working toward NATO's new defence investment pledge: 3.5% of GDP for core defence and 1.5% for broader defence and security infrastructure, for a total commitment of 5% of GDP by 2035.

As the Prime Minister noted at CANSEC, Canada is already meeting that 1.5% target for critical defence infrastructure. These estimates keep that momentum going. Canada's new government is delivering on its promise to make generational investments in the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces and to further accelerate these investments in the years to come. In a more dangerous and divided world, Canada is taking full responsibility for defending our sovereignty and building our strength as a reliable partner and ally.

Our government made a promise to rebuild, rearm and reinvest in the Canadian Armed Forces, and we are getting it done. A military is only as strong as its people, and this government has made clear that our people in uniform deserve to be treated accordingly. The $1.3 billion in these estimates reflects the historic pay increase we delivered for CAF members; the largest in a generation. Better pay means better recruitment. It means better retention and a more capable and more ready force.

The results are already showing. CAF recruitment is the highest it has been in three decades. Last fiscal year, we surpassed our recruitment goals, bringing in over 6,700 new regular force members. We are also investing $274.9 million in CAF recruitment and training to modernize how we attract and develop the next generation of service members. We are building a more robust recruiting and training system, and we will dedicate the resources needed to be successful.

There is $274.5 million committed for Canadian Forces health services, because the obligation to care for our people does not end when an operation does. The CAF continues to build a more modern, effective and inclusive military supported by digital tools and data-driven processes. Work is ongoing to improve efficiency, reduce delays and align recruitment and training systems with the evolving needs of the organization and of Canadians.

Words do not defend Canada, but capabilities do. The CAF must be ready to operate in the Arctic, across North America, through NORAD, within NATO's collective defence framework and wherever global stability demands a Canadian contribution. These estimates include $7.3 billion for in-service support, keeping the equipment we have available, reliable and sustainable. As well, there is $1.2 billion for fleet equipment readiness to adapt and respond to a faster and more complex security environment. Preparedness also means investing in what comes next.

That is why we have included $12.8 billion for major multi-stage procurements, River class destroyers, joint support ships, Canadian multi-mission aircraft and critical infrastructure investments that will serve Canada for decades. These capabilities will defend our sovereignty in the north, protect our maritime approaches and allow us to operate shoulder to shoulder with our allies.

The Canadian Coast Guard is part of the Department of National Defence's main estimates. The $4 billion included here funds its critical missions, search and rescue, icebreaking, environmental response and ocean science. As part of the defence portfolio, the Coast Guard will now do more, sharing intelligence, coordinating with defence partners and enhancing Canada's maritime security posture. In a country with three oceans and the world's longest coastline, that is no small thing.

No country defends itself alone, not Canada and not our allies. That is reflected in the $3.3 billion in grants and contributions, funding programs, organizations and partners whose work advances Canada's defence mandate. A significant share supports Ukraine through the military training and co-operation program, because the fight for a rules-based international order is one in which Canada has a direct stake.

We are investing in NATO initiatives that strengthen interoperability, intelligence sharing and collective decision-making across the alliance. We are also doubling down on Canada's defence industrial base. These estimates include initial investments for the new Canadian defence industry resilience program, strengthening domestic production capacity and Canadian sovereignty.

That includes support for nitrocellulose production, a critical energetic material for artillery that is in high demand across allied militaries. Programs like IDEaS and MINDS continue to connect innovators, academics and industry to the defence mission, turning Canadian expertise into Canadian capability.

In February, we released Canada's first-ever defence industrial strategy. The framework is straightforward: building Canada first, partnering where we cannot and buying smart where we must. These estimates put that strategy into action.

Spending more is only part of the story. Spending well is the other part. Through the comprehensive expenditure review, the Department of National Defence is targeting approximately $460 million in operating cost reductions from 2026-27 through 2028-29. That means continuing the fleet divestment strategy, streamlining the real property portfolio, expanding energy performance contracts and modernizing project approvals and internal business processes.

The global security environment is not waiting for anyone. We are building again. The 2026-27 main estimates are a down payment on that commitment, an investment in people, in preparedness and in the partnerships that make Canada stronger. We are spending with purpose, we are investing with urgency and we are rebuilding the Canadian Armed Forces with the ambition this moment demands. I urge all members to support these estimates.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member is from Halifax, where I served many years in the navy.

This is $50 billion for the “most ambitious defence rebuild in a generation”, ships, submarines, fighter jets, the Defence Investment Agency and the defence investment strategy. It all sounds impressive. Here is the reality. The Liberals have left Canada with no national security strategy or national defence strategy. Experts, and even worse, our allies are calling us out. Indeed, the Liberals' own “Our North, Strong and Free” plan, which is not a strategy, calls for Canada to have a national security strategy every four years, yet we have none.

Does the member for Halifax agree that they are putting the cart before the horse and that, without a national security strategy, the DIA and the DIS are doomed to fail?

[Shannon Miedema, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly disagree with the member. I do not think that we are putting the cart before the horse. I am really excited about the defence industrial strategy. I am really excited about the vision, hard work and accomplishments so far of our Minister of Defence. I am really proud of all of the members of the defence sector in Halifax, many of whom I know more and more, having taken this role on just over a year ago.

I am excited to continue to partner with them. The response that I have received so far is one of gratitude, optimism and hope for the future of Canada and of our defence.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to supply and appropriations, a major issue for me in the past year has been the announcement about budget cuts to science and research. This will save the government approximately $27 million to $35 million over five years. Will saving this amount over five years really make a difference when we know that the deficit is over $70 billion? The government will save a mere $27 million to $35 million by making cuts to science and research.

What we are also seeing today in Bill C-30 is that the government is going to permit the use of more pesticides without knowing what kind of cocktail this will create and without knowing what impact it will have on human health, because the government is also making cuts to the science and research that would help find alternatives.

Is my colleague concerned about that?

[Shannon Miedema, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am really excited about the dual spending that is happening as we put our strategy into action. Dalhousie University has a wonderful ocean science and research program, and it is capitalizing on defence spending to further ocean science and research. That is a really important piece of it, where we are going to increase our innovation and research.

Excitedly, today, we just announced that the Our Ocean Conference is going to be hosted for the first time in Canada in 14 years in Halifax in 2027, where we will bring all the great minds from science and research together to continue to advance our shared priorities.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her support for members of the Canadian Armed Forces and their families.

The member spoke a lot about the defence industrial strategy, and a previous question suggested that there was no defence strategy. In fact, in the defence industrial strategy, it clearly indicates the 10 sovereign capabilities that Canada has indicated very clearly with respect to what they are looking for in terms of procurement and our own sovereignty.

I would ask the member to elaborate a bit about what she is hearing on the ground in her riding with respect to those 10 sovereign capabilities.

[Shannon Miedema, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my conversations have been more focused on some celebrations lately. We just had the 85th anniversary of the HMCS Sackville. We recommissioned it notionally, which was fantastic. We had the commemoration of the Battle of the Atlantic. I was able to make a funding announcement for improved and increased housing for CAF members in Halifax and across the Halifax Regional Municipality.

My conversations have been much more celebratory of late, but I am sure my constituents have a lot to say on those 10 priorities, and I will be sure to talk to them shortly.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Province of Nova Scotia leases the Maritime Launch Services land for approximately $13,500 per year, yet through the federal agreement that we are going to be debating tonight, Maritime Launch Services receives $55,000 a day. That is a 400,000% increase.

Does the member think that is really, truly good value for money?

[Shannon Miedema, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am very excited about the launch capabilities that we are exploring in Nova Scotia. I have no idea of the details of the provincial government and what deals they are making, so I cannot comment on that any further.