House of Commons photo

Track John

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is liberals.

Conservative MP for Barrie South—Innisfil (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2025, with 58% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Committees of the House December 8th, 2025

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying that I have a lot of respect for my colleague. He is a great guy. We may disagree politically, but I have a lot of respect for him.

I am very pleased that my colleague is looking at the statistics on how committees work. We are doing that as well. Today's debate is about the fact that a number of committee chairs are Liberals. As my colleague said, the chair has a lot of power and can cancel meetings.

Does my colleague think that democracy suffers when Liberal chairs operate this way? Does that diminish the ability of members to do their work in the House and in committees?

Committees of the House December 8th, 2025

Mr. Speaker, it is absurd that we are seeing the government filibuster its own bills, and there is a reason they are doing this. It is because, on every committee, not just the oversight committees, they do not hold the majority. The majority has been held by the opposition parties. After the committees were formed, between the Conservatives and the Bloc, we hold the majority, which means that no vote ever gets to a Liberal chair. What they do instead is cancel the meetings, or take their ball and go home, only to regroup and come back.

What we are seeing is a pattern across all committees, and no member in this place should be surprised, including—

Committees of the House December 8th, 2025

Mr. Speaker, I do have the utmost respect for the hon. member as his party's whip. If the member recalls, last fall this place was seized because the government refused to provide the documents regarding the sustainable development technology fund to a committee of Parliament. It refused. There were 11,000 documents counted last fall that were not being given to a parliamentary committee, despite the fact that the parliamentary committee had demanded that those documents be turned over. I think it is a pattern of these Liberals.

I once heard a very smart person say that the Liberals want an audience. They do not want an opposition. They do not want us to fulfill our constitutional obligation to hold them to account, and that is precisely what is happening in our committees right now.

Committees of the House December 8th, 2025

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member spends all of his time in the House. He should be out watching the committees, as I am, to see the level of obstruction that is going on by the Liberal Party in almost every committee. The challenge right now is that the Liberals know they do not have the majority on every committee, so their only process in not allowing the opposition members, whether they are the Conservatives or the Bloc Québécois, to deal with important committee business is to take their ball, go home, and have their Liberal chairs cancel the meetings, or worse yet, call for a suspension and then never come back, as they did in one of the committees, despite the fact that they had seven hours of additional resources available to them.

The Liberals are obstructing democracy in this place, not the opposition parties.

Committees of the House December 8th, 2025

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to seek concurrence on the first report of the Liaison Committee, which details the work of the standing committees of the House. I am doing so to sound the alarm over the systematic obstruction we are witnessing on multiple committee fronts, perpetrated by the Liberal government.

I will split my time, as well, with the member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South.

In addition to my work as chair of the ethics committee, I serve as the Conservative caucus committee coordinator. As part of my responsibilities, I make a point of observing a wide cross-section of standing committees and can report that Liberal obstruction tactics include purposely not scheduling meetings, intentionally withholding ministers from facing accountability at committee, preventing witnesses from testifying, lengthy filibusters and breaking procedural rules to their advantage.

In a phrase, the Prime Minister treats Parliament like a corporate boardroom meant only to rubber-stamp his agenda. I have news for him and his government: This is a G7 democracy, not a meeting of shareholders.

This is a minority Parliament. Committees are composed in such a way that the Liberals must work with at least one opposition party to advance the government's agenda. It also means that when opposition parties unite to hold the government to account, the government must comply with the will of the committee. However, rather than working constructively with opposition parties, the Liberals prefer to take their ball and go home.

Allow me to cite some examples of Liberal obstruction.

At the justice committee, after Conservatives worked productively to receive witness testimony on Bill C-9, the Liberal law on hate speech, the committee got bogged down by a Liberal filibuster on a Conservative motion that called for the strongest legislative response possible to the Supreme Court ruling that struck down mandatory prison time for those convicted of possession of child sexual abuse and exploitation material.

That is right. Rather than prioritize legislation on hate crimes or bail, the Liberals ran cover for an egregious court decision that eases sentences for perverts in possession of child pornography. They filibustered three meetings: November 6, November 18 and November 20.

Following a filibuster on December 2, after it became clear that the Liberals were not serious about their hate crime bill, Conservatives moved that the committee prioritize the bail bill, Bill C-14. Given the daily news reports of violent crimes being committed by repeat offenders, I would think the Liberals might have wanted to work with us to pass that bail law. Conservatives are of the view that, while the bill does not go nearly far enough to fix the broken bail system, a partial measure is better than nothing.

What did the Liberals do with our offer to work quickly on Bill C-14? They voted to adjourn debate. Instead, the Minister of Justice went rogue and made a deal with the Bloc to remove religious protections built into the Criminal Code as part of the hate speech bill, leading to division in their own caucus and a stalled agenda at the committee.

Nevertheless, Conservatives agreed to work constructively through the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill. The Liberals secured committee resources through to midnight on December 2, but after passing just one clause that day, they quickly adjourned the meeting, preventing the committee from dealing with the amendment on the religious exemption.

Since then, the chair refused to schedule a meeting on December 4 and has yet to put out a meeting notice for this week. While the Liberals obstruct their own agenda, the victims of crime are the ones who suffer.

I will reiterate our offer: Conservatives would be pleased to set aside other work before the committee to see that Bill C-14 becomes law.

Liberal obstruction goes far beyond just the justice committee. At the transport committee, the Conservative Party worked constructively and efficiently on Bill C-5, the so-called Building Canada Act. I note that, since its passage, not one project has been listed in the national interest, and the promise the Liberals made to approve projects and build Canada remains unfulfilled.

Conservatives secured several amendments to that bill, which included protections for indigenous people, as well as ethics and oversight provisions. One might think this would have created some goodwill among parties at the committee table. It did not.

The committee conducted a study on the Driver Inc. issue and examined ways to improve highway safety. Opposition members proposed extending the study by two sessions in order to hear from victims of trucking accidents and obtain related documents from the government. The Liberals are determined not to show Canadians that the government is unable to keep them safe, so they have launched a procedural war against this motion.

To prevent debate, the Liberal chair cancelled meetings scheduled for November 18 and 20. The members of the opposition used an extraordinary tool to force an emergency meeting through Standing Order 106(4), which began on November 25. If members consult the parliamentary website, they will see that the meeting that began on November 25 is still ongoing.

As of now, this is a 13-day meeting. The Liberals began by filibustering for hours, which was followed by a multi-day suspension, another Standing Order 106(4) letter to force the recall of the committee, another four-hour filibuster by the Liberals and another multi-day suspension. At one point, the chair attempted to mislead committee members that a suspension would last 30 minutes, but then he exited out the back door and allowed the suspension to last for days.

Rather than get answers for victims or prepare recommendations for expanded road safety, the Liberals are obstructing the work of the transport committee. We are seeing similar obstruction tactics by chairs at other committees, such as at the finance, science and research, health, and human resources committees, and more. I am pleased to begin this important debate to allow members of the House to air the grievances they have with the conduct of the chairs of these committees. It is a committee Festivus, if one will.

Unfortunately, Liberal chairs are not the only ones obstructing committee work. Ministers of the Crown are also direct participants in this obstruction. We have seen multiple absent ministers. The justice committee invited the Minister of Justice to appear in relation to his mandate and priorities on September 23. He has yet to appear. The Minister of Justice and the Minister of Public Safety were also invited to participate as witnesses in the justice committee study on the bail system. Both ministers declined to participate.

This dynamic duo was repeatedly invited to the status of women committee to participate in its study of section 810 of the Criminal Code and women's safety. Again, they have ignored that invitation. The Minister of Justice was also invited to the national defence committee as part of its study on Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act, given that he would be responsible for the civilian process to deal with sexual harassment in the military. Again, he obstructed the work of the committee and refused to appear.

The finance minister refused the request of the industry committee to appear with respect to the Stellantis contract, despite the fact that he was the minister who signed the deal and the contract in the first place, which has yet to demonstrate any form of job guarantee for Canadian workers. The public safety minister refused to appear at the transport committee as part of its investigation into security concerns around the decision of the Infrastructure Bank to fund the purchase of new vessels from China for BC Ferries.

The Liberals have run interference to prevent the Minister of Industry from appearing at the public safety committee on Bill C-8, even though their proposed law would give her sweeping powers to remove the Internet from citizens. The Minister of Artificial Intelligence has failed to appear at the ethics committee, despite 11 requests to do so, or the status of women committee as it conducts studies on the various impacts of AI on Canadian life.

The Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature has ignored three invitations from the environment committee related to the industrial carbon tax, the global carbon tax on marine transport and the EV mandate. The Minister of Indigenous Services has failed to appear at the indigenous affairs committee to respond to the Auditor General's report on progress for indigenous communities.

The Minister of Jobs and Families, the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure, the Minister of Health, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, the Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement, the Minister of Public Safety, the Minister of Transport, the Minister of Industry, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Finance have all failed to appear before committees on the supplementary estimates.

Billions of tax dollars are going unscrutinized before they go out the door. The list goes on. There is a lot more to say on the Liberal attack on and decline in our democracy, and the attack on committees, but I am short on time. In conclusion, we demand, on behalf of Canadians, that the Liberals end their obstruction and start being accountable for every dollar they spend, law they propose and incursion of freedom they attempt to do.

The Economy December 5th, 2025

Mr. Speaker, the member is blaming climate change for the rise in food prices.

The Liberals will say that things have never been better, but the reality is that things have never been worse. In Ontario, there were 8.7 million visits to a food bank, and grocery prices are expected to cost families $1,000 more in 2026. The Prime Minister said he should be judged by the prices at the grocery store. Well, the verdict is in, but there is still time for him to enter a plea deal on his lower grocery price promise. Will he plead guilty of breach of trust, fraud or both?

The Economy December 5th, 2025

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister told Canadians that he should be judged by the prices at the grocery store. Well, the verdict is in. The 2026 “Canada's Food Price Report” warns that grocery costs will rise by 4% to 6% next year, meaning the average family of four will pay nearly $1,000 more, bringing annual food costs to over $17,500.

One in four Canadian households is already food insecure, and Canadian families, seniors and single moms are being squeezed at the checkout. Why are these Liberals not cutting their inflationary spending, the industrial carbon tax and their new fuel tax, so that Canadians can afford to eat?

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1 December 2nd, 2025

Madam Speaker, I am very proud to represent the rural part of my riding in Innisfil. We have the largest privately held farm in Ontario and the largest onion farm in Canada.

The policies we put forward would have directly impacted, in a positive way, farming communities. For example, the industrial carbon tax is still applied. Every time those farmers buy equipment, buy fertilizer and buy seed, all of that is applicable and has a cascading effect down the supply chain. The hon. member wonders why food inflation and food insecurity are so great in this country. It is a direct result of the failed economic policies of the government that are affecting farmers at the cost level. Those costs are being applied downstream, as well, to the end consumer.

Therefore, I am very proud of the policies we put forward with respect to agriculture, and I am very proud to represent a riding that has agriculture in it.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1 December 2nd, 2025

Madam Speaker, it is a simple response because the Prime Minister knows precisely what is in that blind trust. He set up the investment schemes, green infrastructure, etc. when he was advising the former prime minister, so he knows full well what is in that blind trust.

The problem is that every policy decision he makes can and will, in some way, impact him and his corporate buddies. The Conflict of Interest Act, which the ethics committee is studying right now, has a massive hole that one could drive a truck through, and this is what the Prime Minister is applying right now, as it relates to the general application rule. He can make broad policy decisions that impact his company and his investments, like the tax credits, for example, in the budget implementation act, or nuclear deals with the United States in Washington, which his company owns.

All this means that the blind trust is not really blind at all to the Prime Minister and that he can, in fact, use his position to influence policy decisions and make millions at the same time.

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1 December 2nd, 2025

Madam Speaker, that got the member going. The truth hurts. Actually, everything I said is open source and based on testimony at the ethics committee and on some of the discussions and questions in the House.

The difference is that the Prime Minister holds the levers of power in this country. Every decision he makes can and will benefit him, Liberal-connected insiders and his corporate buddies. When members of the opposition hold stocks, let us say in Brookfield, they do not hold the levers of power that will enrich themselves.

The truth is the truth, and what I spoke today is the truth.