Debates of June 8th, 2026

Concurrence in Vote 5—Department of National Defence

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to once again thank my esteemed colleague for that very interesting question. What happened in Mirabel with the supposedly international airport that never came to be was that the government had to return nearly 90% of the land that it stole from people. People had to buy it back at today's prices. That is what happened. Now, Alto is coming to our area, even though Mirabel still bears the scars of past expropriations. I do not want Berthier—Maskinongé to experience that kind of horror.

Alto is coming to my area and terrorizing people along a 10-kilometre-wide stretch. The government is telling us not to worry because Alto only needs 60 metres. First of all, there is going to be a construction site around that 60 metres. Second, if only 60 metres is needed, then why take a stretch 10 kilometres wide? It looks like the government is planning to take more land than it needs. Is it going to try to resell the land around this train through land speculation to fund this huge project?

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

Mr. Speaker, I thought my colleague's speech was very interesting, especially the first part, when he talked about drifting away from democracy. It resonated with me, because I was elected last year and I have noticed that, month after month, the government keeps introducing legislation to bypass lots of other legislation, saying that, from now on, as much power as possible is going to be placed under certain ministers' discretion.

What risk does my colleague see in all that?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The member for Berthier—Maskinongé has 45 seconds to answer.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is not much time to assess this risk.

The risk is that anyone can make decisions about anything. Let me draw a parallel. During COVID‑19, members of the Conservative Party wanted us to vote on motions that would lift the health measures in place for air travel. We agreed, but we had the wisdom to concede that we were not microbiologists or epidemiologists. We therefore asked to include wording to the effect of “with the consent of public health authorities”.

The danger is that uninformed people will make decisions—under pressure from lobby groups or economic pressures—to approve products, including crop protection products that will be used on our land. Later, our children and grandchildren end up paying the price. It is terrifyingly serious.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, and especially for his last answer, which I think was quite intelligent, and full of common sense and wisdom.

As my colleague also said in his speech, at the Bloc Québécois, and in Lac‑Saint‑Jean in particular, we are not satisfied with simply noting that economic challenges exist. We propose ambitious but above all achievable ideas to help our regional economy grow. It is in that spirit that I wish to draw the attention of the House to a very real opportunity for our region. A unit or subunit of the Canadian Armed Forces reserve is being established in northern Lac‑Saint‑Jean.

At a time when the federal government is announcing historic investments in defence and looking to increase its military personnel to 39,000 members by 2032, Lac‑Saint‑Jean has everything that a reserve unit needs. The project being considered in Saint‑Félicien has strong local and regional support. In fact, the mayor of Saint‑Félicien was here on the Hill today to promote this great project with people from the Department of National Defence.

I should mention that this work had already begun several years ago. A feasibility study had confirmed the project's potential, but the 2021 federal election put a halt to the process. There had even been discussions in the early 2000s. Today, however, the timing has never been better. The federal government is seeking to strengthen the capabilities of the Canadian Armed Forces, increase the recruitment of reservists and invest more in defence. Our project is directly aligned with these objectives and will generate lasting economic benefits for the Lac-Saint-Jean region. It is a win-win opportunity for both the Department of National Defence and our region.

Moreover, Canada's new defence industrial strategy raises the important question of the capacity of our regions to support growth and meet the current needs of the Canadian Armed Forces. This is precisely where Lac-Saint-Jean stands out. This riding, which I am proud to represent, has very real strengths: solid regional support, clearly expressed by municipal and regional elected officials; infrastructure already in place that can tangibly support training, recruitment and operational support activities; and above all an engaged population. We are not starting from scratch. We are talking about a region that is already organized and structured, and that is capable of hosting a reserve project.

Of particular note is the strategic location of Saint‑Félicien and northern Lac‑Saint‑Jean, which truly serve as the gateway to more northern regions. At a time when Arctic and northern sovereignty issues are becoming increasingly important, this location is turning into a real asset to the government's proposed strategy.

In my riding, we have ambitious but achievable ideas for growing our regional economy. This is the first time I have spoken about this initiative, I know, but there is nothing improvised about it. It is a solid, well-documented project that can have a real impact on achieving federal defence objectives. Moreover, this kind of project is not of military interest only; it also has a role to play in stimulating regional development, maintaining a federal presence in our regions and creating economic benefits for our communities.

Indeed, the riding of Lac-Saint-Jean has five times fewer federal jobs than average compared to other Canadian regions. This was confirmed by the study we commissioned, so it is clearly an inequity that must be addressed. The establishment of a military reserve is a golden opportunity to create jobs, retain our young talent, diversify our economy and strengthen the political weight of our regions. I repeat: In my riding, we have ideas that are ambitious but above all achievable for growing our regional economy, because in Lac-Saint-Jean, we are not content to be mere observers. We want to be key players in the development of our communities.

If the government is serious about its approach and truly wants to achieve the Canadian Armed Forces' modernization and growth objectives, it must absolutely focus on regions like ours. One thing is certain: The federal government will not be able to meet its recruitment goals by limiting itself to major urban centres. Regions therefore have an essential role to play. As mentioned earlier, Lac-Saint-Jean has the infrastructure and resources to host a reserve unit. This project, as I said, is realistic, relevant and beneficial for everyone.

In closing, the message I bring today is quite simple. Lac-Saint-Jean is ready and can truly do its part. I sincerely hope this government will heed my call.

Speaking of which, I have to say that it took months, if not years, before the federal government lifted a finger to help the forestry industry. When it finally did, it still stubbornly refused to address the lumber industry's top priority, which is for the government to buy back the countervailing and anti-dumping duties that are sitting idle in the United States and implement a loan and loan guarantee program to match the amounts being withheld by the United States.

When it comes to the forestry industry, the current government lacks one thing: an understanding of the situation faced by people who make a living from the forest. I understand that situation. Before I was lucky enough to represent the people of Lac-Saint-Jean, I worked on the paper machines at what was then known as the Resolu mill and which is now called the Domtar mill. I know what life is like for those people.

Forestry workers get up very early in the morning and work 12‑hour shifts on a 3‑2‑2‑3 rotation schedule. Does anyone on the other side know what a 3‑2‑2‑3 rotation schedule is? It is three day shifts and two days of leave followed by two night shifts and three days of leave, and then the whole thing starts again but this time with three night shifts and two days of leave followed by two days shifts and three days of leave. That is what life looks like for pulp and paper mill workers.

What does life look like for a guy who harvests lumber? He wonders whether he will have enough money when he gets back to make the payments on his machinery, which costs a fortune. When a sawmill worker wakes up one morning only to be told that there is going to be a temporary shutdown after all, that is what life is like in the forestry sector.

For small forestry communities, it also means that everyone is laid off. For the mechanic, the guy at the corner store or the town's grocery store, it means that people can no longer spend their money there. It means that they will move elsewhere to find work. It means that schools will close. That is the reality for people in the forestry industry.

Meanwhile, the government is telling us that it is going to announce $10 billion over 10 years. We are talking about $10 billion over 10 years that are not even funded for the forestry industry. The government just gave $14 billion to the oil and gas industry for one year, and yet they are telling me that the government is taking action for the forestry industry. The reality for people in the forestry industry is that this industry is in crisis. The time to help them is now.

Meanwhile, the government is singing the praises of its Minister of Finance, who is actually the member for a region where forestry is a key industry. It is hard to believe. This Minister of Finance is flinging money at the oil and gas industry while sawmills are shutting down in his own backyard. That is the reality for the forestry industry. It is downright shocking and frankly bizarre to see what this government's attitude has been for years. It will not raise a finger to help the forestry industry, to help workers.

What is more, those workers are the lifeblood of the industry that is in the best position to fight greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, yet the government is giving money to the industry that is in the worst position to do those things. In fact, the industry it is giving money to is actually making climate change worse. That is just insane.

I hope the government will eventually understand what workers are going through. I hope it will eventually realize that this industry is circular. First, workers need to go get the lumber. Then they need to haul it back by truck. Then they process it into wood chips, which are put through pulpers to make pulp. They also have to make kraft pulp. Then it is sent to the sawmills.

This government has no idea. It does not realize how important this is to Quebec's forestry regions.

I will stop there.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member is wrong when he makes the assessment that the government does not understand. Of course the government understands. That is why we are providing financial support, whether it is for our forestry industry, our aluminum industry or our steel industry. We can appreciate the tension and anxiety within those ndustries.

My question is more in regard to the issue of reserves and Arctic sovereignty, a very high priority. It was not that long ago that the Prime Minister was up north and made a commitment of close to $35 billion in order to invest in the armed forces and protect our sovereignty in the north.

Does the Bloc party support the investment for northern Canada in order to substantiate a very strong, sovereign north—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean.

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

Mr. Speaker, if my colleague listened to the question, he would have realized that I want a Canadian Armed Forces reserve unit in Saint-Félicien, in northern Lac-Saint-Jean.

He said I was wrong about the forestry industry, but he is the one who is completely off base. Sawmills are closing right now. I invite him to come meet the workers who have just lost their jobs, who have just been laid off because the government did nothing. It did not stand up to the Americans over the illegal countervailing duties. That is what happened.

We are in the middle of the sixth trade war, and they are still wondering what they are going to do to respond to this affront from the Americans. They have not done a thing. Meanwhile, when the auto industry gets hit with tariffs, they write a cheque during the election campaign. It took them a week to respond. They are doing absolutely nothing for the forestry industry, even though we have been subject to tariffs for years.

Honestly, that is pretty weak.

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague said he is lucky to represent the people of his riding, Lac-Saint-Jean. I would like to gently correct him. As far as I know, he did not win the lottery to get here. He has duly earned the respect and support of his constituents.

My colleague highlighted how ineffective this government has been over the last 11 years, but looking forward, I was excited about the proposal he brought forward. It is great to hear a Bloc Québécois MP from Lac-Saint-Jean speak so enthusiastically about the future of Canada's north. I find that very interesting.

He also talked about the federal government's impact on his region. I do not want to start a war between Lac-Saint-Jean and Saguenay, but could my colleague talk about the importance of the Bagotville military base, which Canada established during the Second World War precisely to protect the aluminum industry that made it possible to build the aircraft that would liberate the world from Nazism?

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague knows his history well. That is indeed the reason why the Bagotville base was created. It was to protect the aluminum smelters, which were a key sector in the war effort.

Indeed, there are good federal jobs, but my colleagues should know that these jobs are in La Baie. Speaking of La Baie and Saint-Félicien, the drive between the two locations still takes a good two and a half hours. The drive between my town, Alma, and my colleague's riding is shorter. That should give you some idea. Still, it is a long way, which is why we commissioned this study proving that northern Lac-Saint-Jean is under-represented when it comes to federal jobs.

As for protecting Canada's north, my dream is that the Quebec army and the Canadian army will one day conduct joint exercises to defend the Arctic.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I fully agree with what our colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk was saying. Our colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean has not won the lottery. He is lucky, it is true, because he comes from a fine riding, but the people of Lac-Saint-Jean are truly lucky to be able to count on him.

I can see that he knows the issues very well. To his credit, he spoke about them with passion. I find it hard to believe the government would turn a deaf ear to these requests. As the MP for Lac-Saint-Jean explained, establishing a base in Lac-Saint-Jean would meet the desired recruitment targets and enable people who have lost their jobs to find new ones. It is a win-win situation.

I listened to him and I cannot believe that there has not already been some indication from members of the government that they are going to move forward, that they like the idea, that people can count on them, that they will be there. However, that does not seem to be the case. Does my colleague have any idea how the government will respond to this proposal, which is sound and is in everyone's interest?

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

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question. In fact, I have to say that the government is being open. We had meetings today. I hope that, in addition to this political openness, there will be openness on the part of the Department of National Defence. I am certain that we can convince people at the Department of National Defence to create this unit or subunit.

We have the support, which is rare, of the mayor of Roberval, the mayor of Dolbeau-Mistassini, the reeve of the Domaine‑du‑Roy RCM, and the reeve of the Maria‑Chapdelaine RCM. Many municipalities will be voting on resolutions at their city councils to support this idea. Saint‑Félicien has a CEGEP and reservists get 50% of their post-secondary education paid for by the army when they pursue this opportunity. In short, I think this is a great project for northern Lac‑Saint‑Jean.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member from Milton East—Halton Hills South.

I think we all know that fraud in Canada is a growing problem. Stories are now appearing in the media virtually every week. Data from the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre shows that Canadians lost $638 million to fraud in 2024. Reported losses to the CAFC since 2021 have now surpassed $2 billion. The rate of frauds being reported remains low, with an estimated only 5% to 10% being reported, so the problem is understated and in the billions of dollars.

We know that fraudsters generally target the most vulnerable people among us, such as seniors, new Canadians and young people. Bank fraud in particular is a significant concern in Canada, yet investigations by financial institutions often end with banks' blaming the very customers who trusted them with protecting their money. This raises the issue of the proper responsibility of banks to their depositors and the role of the federal government in regulating or not regulating them properly.

I would like to share with the House some real examples that have been brought to my attention recently by constituents in Vancouver Kingsway. For case number one, I will read from the letter I received:

“In early September, my dad, a 67 year old retiree called me in a panic. He had just realized he had been scammed out of his entire life savings and more. He was involved in what we believe was a ‘pig butchering’ scam. He was told he was investing in cryptocurrency—he had a wallet which showed incredibly high returns. When he went to withdrawal, he was hit with yet another fee of $90,000 USD to do so. His ‘partner’ who was to be paying the fees to share in the investment suddenly said she didn't have anymore money. This is when he realized.

“...Going through the details of the scam ended up showing that my dad didn't purchase crypto in a typical way. He was directed to the bank to wire money to several different locations. Locally here in Vancouver, then to New York and then finally to Vietnam.

“My dad opened a new account at BMO in April 2025 and thus the transactions begun. Every 10-14 days my dad went to the same branch on Mainland Street in Yaletown and sent anywhere from $100,000-$300,000 USD to accounts based in Vietnam under the guise of ‘purchasing auto parts.’ Every single time he wire transferred the money, the same branch manager signed off on it. No questions asked. By the end of August he had drained most of his RRSPs, remortgaged his home, took out personal loans, and borrowed from family and friends. l'm dumbfounded by the fact that the branch manager at this location never noticed the red flags: a brand new customer, a senior retiree, purchasing nearly $2 million dollars in auto parts from a personal bank account.

“I filed a complaint against BMO.... They refuse to answer if my dad was ever reported to FINTRAC. They replied that he signed off on the wire transfers that stated if he was being coached into cryptocurrency he shouldn't go through with it—none of the wire transfers use that type of language. Further, BMO states that they have a policy in place for prevention of fraud with seniors—obviously this policy wasn't followed in this instance. There has been zero accountability for what happened from BMO. They have said they will not return or refund any of the money and that this was completely my dad's own doing.

“My dad died of a sudden fatal collapse on January 5th, 2026. Months of stress and uncertainty, embarrassment and emotional toll had taken place. He had nothing. Forced to sell his condo to pay off some of his debt but seemingly about to be homeless.

“Fraud is abundant. We read about it all the time. I simply don't understand how the bank could see such large sums of money to be transferred with no regard. And at this point, they simply do not care....

“But I do want something good to come out of his death—more people need to hear stories like this for real change to happen....

“The lack of responsibility by BMO has changed the course of my life. My dad will not get to watch [my or my sisters'] families grow up. He will never financially contribute towards us. We are now left with the bill of his death and bankrupting his estate. lt's a devastating end.”

Example number two is Mrs. L, a 79-year-old senior who was the victim of a devastating financial fraud that resulted in the loss of a significant portion of her retirement life savings. Fraudsters impersonated law enforcement and coerced her into selling her retirement investments in her registered retirement accounts and wiring the money abroad to them from local RBC and TD branches. She lost some $400,000 in her life savings. To add insult to injury, she now faces a significant tax liability from the CRA due to this, despite already having suffered a complete financial loss of much of her retirement savings. Because she withdrew RSP savings, which were then stolen, she now has to pay taxes on these monies, even though they have been lost to her.

The NDP recently moved seven amendments to Bill C-15, the budget 2025 implementation act, no. 1, aimed at strengthening protections for Canadians targeted by bank-related fraud. Unfortunately, Liberals and Conservatives combined to defeat them, and we see nothing addressing this in these estimates. Our amendments would have required banks to reimburse customers who fall victim to consumer-targeted fraud, unless they have been grossly negligent in relation to that fraud. Banks would have also been required to report anonymized consumer-targeted fraud data, so we could get a better understanding of the scope of this problem. The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada would have been required to conduct regular unannounced audits of banks' anti-fraud practices and policies, publish detailed fraud statistics and make its annual fraud report public, so that we could make sure that banks are actually following through on the policies they claim to have. The amendments also sought to make decisions of the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments binding.

These measures were recommended by advocacy organizations, including Option consommateurs and Democracy Watch, which argued that without mandatory audits, transparency, and accountability mechanisms, existing anti-fraud rules would remain ineffective.

The United Kingdom recently brought in new rules requiring that a consumer who is a victim of a fraud known as an APP scam, which is a scam wherein the scammer convinces the victim to make a payment, must be reimbursed, unless there is gross negligence on their part. In Quebec, the Consumer Protection Act was recently amended to impose reimbursement obligations on financial institutions in cases of fraud involving a consumer's bank account.

I want to quote Democracy Watch, which noted this:

It is not enough to just require the banks to have policies and procedures in place. The Bank Act was changed in 2018 to add...two provisions requiring banks to have policies, procedures and training to ensure the financial interests of their customers are protected...but the FCAC was not required in those provisions to audit the banks to ensure they comply with those provisions and, as a result, the FCAC has done nothing to ensure they actually comply....

The new anti-bank account fraud measures will also have little effect unless the FCAC is required to conduct regular, unannounced audits and to prosecute and penalize violations...

Option consommateurs noted this:

We believe that an approach that holds banks more accountable will not only allow thousands of Canadians who are victims of fraud to be able to recover their money, but it will also decrease the occurrence of such fraud. By placing greater responsibility on banks, the legislative framework will incentivize these businesses to deploy the appropriate measures to prevent their losses.

The example of the United Kingdom is a clear illustration of this. According to the Payment Systems Regulator, following the entry into force of the new consumer protection framework, the number of claims for...fraud decreased by approximately 15% between October 2024 and June 2025, compared to the same period [the year before].

With the advent of AI and growing technology, the prospects of fraud growing in this country are chilling. Imagine a senior answering the phone and hearing the computer-generated voice of their bank manager or their grandchild, who is asking them to wire money somewhere. This is the kind of technology that exists now, yet we are operating on outdated legislation. Although the government did put a financial crimes agency in the budget, which is a good step forward, it can and should do much more to help protect Canadians from fraud in this country. New Democrats will certainly work together to help make that happen.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member raises an issue that I know affects so many people. All members of Parliament are genuinely concerned about these unethical individuals, many living outside of Canada. With the modernization of technology of the Internet, phone scams, robocalls being made and vast numbers of emails, scams take many different forms. Unfortunately, it is quite often the vulnerable in society who are targeted, but it goes even beyond that. I am very familiar with a senior, Peter, who was defrauded of hundreds of thousands of dollars also. I think it is important that we highlight the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre as an organization that does some good things.

I appreciate the comments of the member regarding the budget. We—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is right. The problem is staggering. If the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre said that Canadians lost $638 million to fraud in 2024, and only 5% to 10% is being reported, we are talking about $6 billion to $12 billion a year being lost to fraud in this country.

I know we cannot stop it entirely, but what we can and should be doing is taking measures. The government should really look at the amendments the NDP put forward, because we can place more responsibility on banks, which are financial experts, to watch for the red flags and maybe ask questions so that when vulnerable people are going to banks and being defrauded, at least that is addressed in some meaningful manner.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for bringing this debate to the floor. It is a deplorable situation where people are exploited, particularly in their golden years, out of everything they have made and hope to pass on to their children. I appreciate the member doing that.

One of the challenges is that bank officials do not necessarily understand, and when someone comes in who seems to have full use of their faculties, they are loath to either start asking questions or even stop a transaction. Provincial governments can make a big difference. Right now, if someone loses the ability to make good judgments for themselves, oftentimes a court order has to be received by family members who are concerned. Basically, it is like a light switch, saying that someone who had autonomy to make their own decisions is no longer able to do that.

I know the member has Mr. David Eby's number on speed dial. Is he prepared to talk to the province about changing the provincial laws so they are not like a light switch?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, this is going to take a multi-jurisdictional approach. The member is quite right that the provinces have a role to play, but the federal government regulates banks and the banking sector.

One of my children has a disability, and every January or February I make a contribution to her RDSP. When I do that, because I have made only one contribution a year, I have to answer about 20 minutes of questions to assess my level of investor knowledge, and yet I just read out examples of a senior walking into a bank who just opened an account and is wiring hundreds of thousands of dollars to Vietnam, and they get one question asked of them.

I think that banks can and should be doing much more to flag these problems, and perhaps we can at least help some of these seniors who are being defrauded out of their life savings.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague raised some good points. I liked the part where he talked about the protections that Quebec offers consumers.

I would like to talk to him about the business world. Berthier—Maskinongé witnessed a minor miracle this morning. It was the grand reopening of Duchesne et Fils, which had been under the protection of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for months. All of the elected officials, namely the MNA, the RCM's reeve, the mayor and myself, worked as a team and helped Groupe Zohar, the company that took over. We were happy. The employees' faces looked so different today compared to a few weeks ago, when a press conference was held to sound the alarm and point out that more time was needed. This is the kind of thing we need to do.

Companies, Quebec's SMEs, need help. Firms are going out of business. That is what made this morning's event so special. Would my colleague not agree that our wage subsidy proposal, which I keep bringing up here every chance I get, would help with that?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, my heart goes out to those employees, and I agree with my hon. colleague that the SME sector is critical to Canada's growth. What I would say is that Quebec is leading the country in advocating changes to the way banks are held responsible for these fraud situations, so I think we should study the Quebec example and apply those very valid mechanisms at the federal level as well.

[Kristina Tesser Derksen, Liberal, Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to the 2026-27 main estimates for national defence and to this government's efforts to rebuild, rearm and reinvest in the Canadian Armed Forces.

We all know the global threat landscape has changed. The threats we face are numerous and multiplying, from incursions in the Canadian Arctic to attacks on our cyberspace. Canada cannot meet these challenges with yesterday's tools. The first job of the government is to keep Canadians safe. Our government is protecting Canadians and supporting our allies with an approach that transforms defence procurement. We need a ready and resilient Canadian Armed Forces that can recruit and retain skilled people and that has the training, infrastructure and modern capabilities needed to succeed in today's complex and volatile security environment.

Defence and security have become the nation's top priority, as evidenced by the significant increase in planned spending in the 2026-27 main estimates. We are requesting $50.7 billion for the Department of National Defence. That is $15 billion over the previous year, roughly a 42% increase in funding. That includes an additional $5.1 billion in operating funding, $7.1 billion in capital funding and $2.3 billion in grants and contributions. These are significant investments in Canada's security, our sovereignty, our alliances and our people in uniform, who give so much of themselves to serve this country.

Last year, Canada spent 2% of GDP on defence for the first time in nearly four decades, ahead of its original schedule. With these main estimates, we are continuing that momentum, working toward NATO's new defence investment pledge of 5% of GDP by 2035. That commitment includes 3.5% for core defence requirements and 1.5% for broader defence and security-related spending. In fact, the Prime Minister noted at CANSEC that Canada is already meeting that 1.5% target for critical defence infrastructure.

These estimates will help us support our people, strengthen our preparedness and build the partnerships Canada needs in a more dangerous world. A significant portion of this funding, $1.3 billion, reflects last year's historic pay increase for members of the Canadian Armed Forces to better reflect the unique challenges and sacrifices of a life of service. Improved compensation also strengthens recruitment and retention, reinforces readiness and gives members in uniform greater certainty as they serve. The estimates also include $274.9 million for CAF recruitment and training. This will help update processes and systems to improve the applicant experience and grow the pool of prospective members. It will also modernize training so new members can get up to speed quickly and start contributing sooner in the roles they signed up for. There is also $274.5 million for Canadian Forces health services to care for our people serving across Canada and overseas. Compensation, benefits, health care and predictable support are all necessary to support military readiness.

Equally necessary are the capabilities to defend Canada, support North American security and contribute to peace and stability with our allies and partners. The CAF must be prepared to operate at home and abroad, defend Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic, strengthen continental security through NORAD operations, contribute to collective defence through NATO and support other missions that enhance global peace and regional stability. These estimates include funding for those operations, as well as contribution funding for military training and capacity-building activities. They also include $7.3 billion for in-service support to ensure the availability, reliability and long-term sustainability of military equipment. We are also requesting $1.2 billion for fleet equipment readiness to give the defence team the direction and resources needed to adapt and respond to a more dynamic and complex security environment.

Canada also needs to make major investments in future capabilities. That is why we have included $12.8 billion for multi-stage procurements that will allow the CAF to operate effectively now and for decades to come: river-class destroyers, joint support ships, Canadian multi-mission aircraft and other major equipment and infrastructure investments. These will strengthen Canada's sovereignty in the north, protect maritime approaches, support deployed operations, contribute to continental defence and operate alongside allies.

The Canadian Coast Guard is also part of the national defence main estimates. The $4 billion we have included for the Coast Guard will go toward capital funding, operating funding and grants and contributions. The Canadian Coast Guard will continue to deliver its critical missions of search and rescue, icebreaking, environmental response, safe navigation and ocean science. However, as part of National Defence, it will now play a greater role in Canada's security, collaborating with security and defence partners to share information, coordinate activities and enhance training, strategic planning and innovation, because in a country with three oceans and the world's longest coastline, the Coast Guard's maritime expertise is a national asset, and it is one of great pride.

All of these investments are necessary to boost Canada's preparedness in a precarious world. We need to plan, be strategic and maintain the discipline required to focus our resources where they deliver the greatest value.

We know, too, that we cannot do this alone. Defending Canada and contributing to global stability is a national effort that demands strong partnerships across the government, industry and academia and with our allies. That is why National Defence's grants and contributions have increased significantly, with $3.3 billion in the main estimates to support programs, organizations and recipients whose activities advance Canada's defence mandate. A large part of this funding supports Ukraine through the military training and co-operation program. It includes contributions to NATO initiatives that benefit all allies while strengthening Canada's access to shared decision‑making, intelligence, capabilities and interoperability.

We are also strengthening Canada's defence industrial base. That includes establishing a new Canadian defence industry resilience program. These estimates include initial investments for this program, which will strengthen Canadian sovereignty and increase production capacity for Canadian defence businesses. It will also support Canada's ability to produce nitrocellulose, which is a critical, high-demand, energetic material for artillery.

We are collaborating with innovators, academics, defence and security experts and other partners through programs such as IDEaS, innovation for defence excellence and security, and MINDS, mobilizing insights in defence and security. All of these partnerships help turn Canadian expertise into defence capability. They support innovation, domestic capacity and Canada's ability to contribute to allied security with greater resilience and independence.

In conclusion, Canadians expect their government to protect the country, support the people who serve and manage public funds responsibly. We want to reassure them that National Defence continues to find savings through the comprehensive expenditure review.

The departmental plan outlines approximately $460 million in operating cost reductions, beginning in 2026‑27 and continuing through to 2028‑29. These measures include continuing the fleet divestment strategy, streamlining the real property portfolio, expanding energy performance contracts and modernizing project approvals and internal business processes. That work reinforces the same principle that runs through these estimates. We are spending with purpose, focusing our resources and delivering better value for the defence team, for CAF members and for Canadians. We are investing in people. We are investing in preparedness. We are investing in partnerships.

The 2026‑27 main estimates support Canada's path towards NATO's new defence investment pledge and they reflect this government's commitment to rebuild, rearm and reinvest in the Canadian Armed Forces.

The world has changed, and Canada's defence investments are changing with it.

[Harb Gill, Conservative, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, while we debate billions in government spending, Canadians and Windsorites learned today about the opening of the Gordie Howe International Bridge, and from Michigan officials, no less. This government is still silent about it. This project, as my colleague knows, is years behind schedule and nearly half a billion dollars over budget.

If the government cannot even tell us clearly about one of the largest infrastructure projects in our country's history, which Canadians paid for, by the way, how can Canadians have confidence in the government that it can properly manage the billions of dollars the government is asking us to approve today?

[Kristina Tesser Derksen, Liberal, Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that my colleague knows this project began under former prime minister Stephen Harper. I will also point out that it is a partnership with another country, to the south of us, which has not been entirely co-operative throughout the process.

I am confident that my colleague and this House will hear good news soon on the project.

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

Mr. Speaker, with regard to defence spending, what has been done over the past few months is pretty spectacular. The government has invested an additional $60 billion in the space of 10 months.

What I have to point out is that Canada was a laggard and had not been doing its part since 2014. Our fear is that one big push can come with certain risks, such as the risk of abuse, the risk that the money will be invested unwisely.

Is my colleague willing to acknowledge that Canada was dragging its feet and that it only woke up when global instability spiked?

[Kristina Tesser Derksen, Liberal, Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for pointing out the great strides our government has made in spending recently, including reaching NATO's 2% defence spending target five years ahead of schedule, as well as the incredible, unprecedented pay raise for every member of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Yesterday was the Canadian Armed Forces national appreciation day. I want to take the opportunity to express my gratitude and appreciation on behalf of every member of this House, I am sure, for our Canadian Armed Forces and our men and women serving in uniform to keep us safe.