Andrew Scheer

[Election of Speaker, May 26th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, the speakership itself has been tested, unfortunately with some Speakers caught in the middle of scandals themselves. I have heard it said that it has all gone downhill since the last time a Conservative was elected Speaker, but I could not possibly comment on that.

In all seriousness, you are not a commissioner of Parliament but a servant of the House, and that is an important dynamic. You are held accountable by members, and each of us is accountable to our voters. Debates should be passionate; they should be lively. The lives of Canadians are changed by the decisions we make, so it is normal that members get enthusiastic and fiery. When the stakes are so high, often the best thing you can do is allow the players to play a little.

This is where the government is held to account. It has an enormous amount of power, and we parliamentarians must provide ruthless scrutiny on every dollar taken out of the pockets of Canadians, every infringement on their liberties and every single decision the government makes. Of course, every Parliament has its own unique challenges and messy moments, but as Winston Churchill said, “democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried”.

Mr. Speaker, we offer you our support and our best wishes for your speakership over this Parliament.

[Election of Speaker, May 26th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by congratulating you. You have earned members' support to manage the House for the next few months or years. We will see.

I too would like to indulge myself and take this opportunity to thank the voters of Regina—Qu'Appelle, and indeed my spouse. I would like to thank my wife Jill for the sacrifice that she and my family make, as all our spouses and significant others do.

Mr. Speaker, you have just taken charge of an office that is almost as old as Parliament itself. It emerged in the Middle Ages when the commons needed a spokesman to air its grievances to the king, a task that probably would not stand up to the safe workplace guidelines that exist today. As we know, until the 17th century, the Speaker's loyalty was to the Crown rather than to MPs, and they were often blamed if they delivered bad news to the monarch. Seven Speakers were beheaded between 1394 and 1535, and many more were imprisoned. Managing monarchs was a delicate undertaking.

One Speaker, John Wenlock, during the Wars of the Roses, when no one could be sure who would end up as king, tried to hedge his bets by fighting for both the York family and the Lancastrians. It did not work out too well for him, though: He died at the Battle of Tewkesbury. Of course, he was not the last politician to try to be on both sides of a contentious issue. I dare say we may find some Liberal MPs voting for things that they were very recently voting against.

Gradually, the Speaker's role became one of representing Parliament rather than the monarch, and it was not until the Victorian era that impartiality of the Speaker became the norm. It might no longer be a requirement to stand up to kings and queens, but you may find yourself having to stand up to other offices of authority. If such a moment presents itself, we trust that you will stand with the Speakers who came before you who defended this institution on behalf of the people.

As I look back over the last few parliaments, we did have some trying times. We witnessed injuries from flying elbows, F-bombs dropped and a few appearances of one member in a state of undress. I did hear that CPAC was considering putting “May contain violence, coarse language and nudity” as a warning on the daily broadcast, but so far it has not had to do that.

[The Economy, December 17th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are so proud of that fall budget that they tabled it in the House and then ran and hid for the rest of the day. Let us recap. The Prime Minister announced $250 cheques and then had to cancel them. He announced a two-month GST tax trick that businesses say they will not implement and that the Prime Minister now says is optional. We have a broken immigration system. Parliament is seized with a $400-million corruption scandal. All the while, there are 2 million food bank visits, doubled housing costs and record-high consumer debt. The dollar is below 70¢ U.S., and the Prime Minister is raising prices by quadrupling the carbon tax.

Again, why not let Canadians decide their future by calling a carbon tax election?

[The Economy, December 17th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the new finance minister for being the fourth finance minister in a 24-hour period, but it is the same old talking points. What the Liberals did yesterday was smash through that $40-billion guardrail. What does that mean? It means Canadians have to pay back all that money with interest, and 43¢ of every dollar they earn now has to go to pay the tax burden. It means more money to bankers and bondholders. In fact, the government is now spending more on the interest on that debt than on health care, but the Prime Minister does not care. He does not worry about where the money comes from. He has never had to worry about that.

Why not let Canadians decide their future by calling a carbon tax election?

[The Economy, December 17th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, what a mess. Yesterday was a gong show at the bottom of a dumpster fire, wrapped up in a cluster. The former finance minister resigned and the Prime Minister hid all day, and then he had to beg his MPs not to fire him, but the worst news, buried underneath it all, was a devastating gut punch to Canadian taxpayers: a $62-billion deficit smashing through the already insane $40-billion guardrail.

Canada is a serious G7 NATO partner, staring down the threat of 25% tariffs. We deserve a strong leader with a new mandate. Why not let Canadians decide by calling a carbon tax election?

[Points of Order, December 16th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I just want to remind you that the order that the House adopted was very specific. It states:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order, special order, or usual practice of the House, at 4:00 p.m. on Monday, December 16, 2024, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings to permit the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance to make a statement followed by a period of up to 10 minutes for questions and comments; after the statement, a Member from each recognized opposition party, and a Member of the Green Party, may reply for a period approximately equivalent to the time taken by the Minister's statement....

A minister of the Crown just came in and made a statement. Her statement was that she was tabling the fall economic update. That is the statement. At the very least, there should now be a 10-minute period of questions and comments. The government House leader chose to have a very short statement. There is nothing we can do about that. She came in, tabled it and then ran out before there could be any accountability or scrutiny.

I believe the most logical thing for the Chair to do would be to accept that as the statement that it was, which I would say is a perfect statement on the state of the Liberal government right now, and, at the very least, allow opposition parties and opposition members to ask questions of the government as to what was in the fall economic update.

[Points of Order, December 16th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I want to go over the facts of this case.

Last week, a few days ago, the government House leader negotiated in good faith, with all the opposition parties, a process by which the fall economic update could be tabled in the House. We all agreed on that. That was not something that was going to happen automatically. It took the participation of all parliamentary parties to allow that to happen. We agreed in good faith. We expected it to happen.

Everything that has happened today has been entirely of the government's own making. Parliamentarians should not be deprived of the information as to what the fiscal situation is here in Canada. Canadians are facing an unprecedented crisis on housing, inflation, debt and deficits. The Liberal government has a statutory obligation to table these documents by the end of the year. This is the second last sitting day, and you have just denied a request for an emergency debate on this very same issue.

There is no other opportunity for parliamentarians to find out just how bad the books are. I go back to the point as to the fact that the government itself initiated this agreement. The government committed to opposition parties that it would happen today.

I ask you this, Mr. Speaker. The fact that it is in chaos is not the problem of parliamentarians. It is a problem for Canadians, but it is not a problem caused by Canadians, and they have a right to know exactly what is happening with their tax dollars. For the government to come in at literally the last minute and pull the carpet out from under an economic update is unbelievable. It is not the actions of a serious G7, NATO partner country.

At the very least, Mr. Speaker, I ask that you find the government in contempt of the House order that was passed by all members of this place.

[Request for Emergency Debate, December 16th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I have been in this place now for over 20 years. I have never seen a situation like this before. Today is the day the government waited until to table the fall economic update where it would publish the true deficit numbers that Canadians will be on the hook for.

As the House knows, the former finance minister resigned this morning. Things are unclear; there are some media reports indicating that there may be a replacement now, but at the time of the writing of her letter, it was not even clear who the finance minister was.

All this is at a time when Canadians are facing an emergency situation. They are facing the fastest rate of inflation in over a generation with food inflation; food prices are rising 37% faster here in Canada than in the United States. They are facing a housing crisis that the Prime Minister caused by doubling housing costs with mortgage and rent payments. Two million Canadians are lining up at food banks. There is crime and chaos on our streets, and now the government is in shambles.

By waiting until the second-last day of the December sitting, the government was hoping to table the fall economic update and then run and hide for six weeks in the snow, depriving parliamentarians of holding the government to account, the very thing Parliament exists for: to oversee government spending.

Because of the situation, we find ourselves in an unprecedented case where some new person is going to table the fall economic update, we believe. It is still unclear, according to media reports. It is unclear how the economic update will be presented, and it is unclear whether or not any parliamentarians will be able to participate in any kind of questioning of whichever minister ends up delivering it or tabling it, if one actually does. Then the House will rise at the end of the day tomorrow for six weeks.

Because of this unprecedented and emergency situation, I believe that the best thing you, Mr. Speaker, can do to uphold the integrity of Parliament as an institution that exists to oversee, scrutinize and approve government taxation and spending is to grant an emergency debate. That is what my letter to you outlines.

When we look at the situation facing Canada, including threats from abroad; 25% tariffs; staring down the barrel of a gun pointed at us by a U.S. President-elect with a strong and fresh new mandate, who can smell weakness from a mile away; and a cabinet in chaos, with one-fifth of the government caucus demanding that the Prime Minister resign, we believe that it is now time for you, Mr. Speaker, to grant the House at least the opportunity to question the government for a few hours this evening on what should be its fall economic presentation.

The former finance minister herself said that going past the $40-billion guardrail would plunge the country into another round of nightmarish inflation and interest rate hikes. Media reports are speculating as to how high the deficit will go.

I know that there are precedents and guidelines you, Mr. Speaker, might look to as to whether you should approve an emergency debate. However, given the fact that there is really no other opportunity for parliamentarians to debate the issues, to scrutinize the economic update that is scheduled to happen this afternoon, I believe it is incumbent upon you now, Mr. Speaker to consider the rights of individual MPs and the House as a collective to be the representatives of Canadian taxpayers and to hold the government to account for its economic update later on today.

[Finance, December 16th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the attacks on the government's economic record are coming from inside the Liberals' own cabinet, and it looks more and more as though carbon tax Carney's plan to push out the Prime Minister is working as well. For carbon tax Carney, it has always been profits over people. We can look at his record: Since he became the top economic adviser to the PM, he has moved his own company's headquarters to New York City, and he has been caught unethically lobbying the U.K. government. His firm, Brookfield, is now looking for $10 billion in taxpayers' money for a new investment fund, which would be managed by Brookfield, his own company.

Canadians deserve better than the government in shambles. Why not call a carbon tax election and let Canadians decide for themselves?

[Finance, December 16th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, carbon tax Carney is the Prime Minister's official economic adviser, and his plan was always to push out the finance minister and take her place. Let us look at his advice so far. He forced her to bring in the GST tax trick. Carney also forced through insane inflationary spending, smashing through that $40-billion guardrail. Carney's economic plan is so bad the finance minister resigned in protest rather than humiliate herself into reading his homework. Now nobody knows who the finance minister is.

Enough is enough. Why will the Prime Minister not do the only honourable thing left and let Canadians decide for themselves in a carbon tax election?