House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
45th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • No. 118
CONTENTS
Wednesday, May 6, 2026
House of Commons Debates
Volume 152
No. 118
1st SESSION
45th PARLIAMENT
OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)
Wednesday, May 6, 2026
Speaker: The Honourable Francis Scarpaleggia
The House met at 2 p.m.
Prayer
[English]
It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem, led by the hon. member for Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner.
[Members sang the national anthem]
Statements by Members
[Statements by Members]
[English]
Asian Heritage Month
Mr. Speaker, this May, Canadians mark Asian Heritage Month, and someone who comes from a city like Vancouver, as I do, does not have to look far to understand why that matters.
There is no one Asian story in Canada; there are tens of thousands. They are written in many languages, carried through many faiths, shaped by many histories and lived through families that crossed oceans, built lives from nothing, endured exclusion and still chose to give this country their labour, their hope and their children's future. Those of us who grew up in Vancouver know this story well. We know it in the restaurants that feed us, the businesses that raise up our neighbourhoods, the music and festivals that fill our streets, the athletes who carry our pride and the volunteers who show up for community day after day.
Asian Canadians did not simply arrive in Canada. They have helped build it. They have established communities, preserved culture and built bonds across differences. This month we honour that legacy and this commitment, not as a footnote to Canadian history but as a critical story in that history and in Canada's future.
I invite all members of the—
Ronald McDonald House Charities
Mr. Speaker, today is McHappy day, a day when every purchase at McDonald's helps support families through the Ronald McDonald House charities. In Alberta, 65% of families live outside a city with a children's hospital, meaning that many families must travel far from home and their support networks to access specialized care. In these moments, Ronald McDonald Houses provide a home away from home to families right across Canada. Last year, from Fort McMurray—Cold Lake alone, 52 families benefited from Ronald McDonald House stays, each bringing a little more normalcy and a chance for kids to be kids and for families to connect.
When a child is seriously ill, families should not have to worry about where they will sleep or where their next meal is going to come from. Ronald McDonald House provides comfort, stability and a place to stay during some of life's most difficult moments.
I encourage all Canadians to take part in McHappy day and help make a meaningful difference for families in need.
Polish Heritage Month
Mr. Speaker, May is Polish Heritage Month in Canada, and Poland's May 3, 1791, constitution is one of the most important events in Poland's history. It has inspired generations of Poles hoping to keep alive aspirations for independence and democracy.
Canada's first recorded Polish immigrant arrived in 1752, and since then, waves of immigration have formed Canada's Polish community, which is now a million people strong in communities from coast to coast to coast. As chair of the Canada-Poland Parliamentary Friendship Group, and with my own Polish roots, I am proud to say Canada's polish community is as strong and vibrant as ever. Poland has become Canada's close NATO ally and our largest trading partner in central and eastern Europe, and our ties continue to grow.
Join us tomorrow at 9 a.m. for the Polish flag raising on Parliament Hill.
Za naszą i waszą wolność, for our freedom and yours.
[Translation]
Marlène Beaudoin
Mr. Speaker, in loving memory of my sister-in-law Marlène Beaudoin, an energetic, dedicated woman who loved her family: her husband Yvon, her children Jonathan, Myriam and Catherine, and her six beloved grandchildren. Always ready to protect us so that we would want for nothing, Marlène leaves us with indelible memories of her devotion to her loved ones.
She was the centre of attention in our family. Her infectious laughter reminds us of the importance of family gatherings at her home and at the family cottage. She loved us dearly, and we loved her just as much. Her resilience over the past decade proved to us what an exceptional woman she was.
We miss her already. May she rest in peace with the love of her entire family.
[English]
Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month
Mr. Speaker, May is Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month, a time for the MS community to come together and raise awareness about this neurological disease. Canadians are wearing carnations today because they are a symbol of hope for the MS community.
Everyone's experience with the disease is different. The symptoms, severity and effectiveness of treatment can vary, which is why the work of MS Canada is so important. Canada has one of the highest rates of multiple sclerosis in the world, with more than 90,000 Canadians living with this disease, including my mother, who has been paralyzed by MS.
This is a pivotal moment for Canada to invest in MS research. The latest science provides hope that MS can be prevented in our lifetime. Let us work together to build a stronger future for Canadians with multiple sclerosis.
[Translation]
619 Beauceville Cadet Corps
Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to rise today to mark the 110th anniversary of the 619 Beauceville Cadet Corps. Since its official founding on September 28, 1915, this unit has left its mark on the history of our community.
Behind those 110 years are generations of young people who have learned discipline, respect, bravery, mutual support and the drive to excel. There are also cherished memories, lasting friendships, proud families, officers, instructors and volunteers who have given their time to guide our young people and instill in them a passion for service.
The 619 Cadet Corps is more than just a youth organization. It is a school of life. It is a pillar of Beauceville. It is a tradition that continues to inspire.
I want to salute the cadets, alumni, officers, instructors, volunteers and everyone involved in the cadet corps who have been there for so many years. I wish the 619 Beauceville Cadet Corps a happy 110th anniversary.
[English]
Semiconductors
Mr. Speaker, this week Canada staked its claim in the global photonics and semiconductor race. Our government announced the spinoff of the Canadian Photonics Fabrication Centre, North America's only end-to-end pure-play compound semiconductor facility, which is built on a legacy stretching from Bell Northern Research and Nortel to the globally competitive companies thriving in Canada today.
Now it has what it needs to reach its full potential, attracting private investment and growing innovative Canadian SMEs and fabrication capacity right here in Canada to meet the soaring global demand in AI, quantum and advanced defence systems. It will remain what it has always been, a proudly sovereign Canadian asset.
I am grateful to the Kanata North Business Association, the National Research Council and every industry champion who helped make this vision possible.
Canada has the talent and the companies. Now it is our place to take the lead.
Justice
Mr. Speaker, I have a surprising project to tell members about. Imagine this: no fences, beautiful townhouse-style living, tennis courts, and fishing in the Rideau River over the summertime. No, I am not talking about a new housing project. I am talking about a jail, a penitentiary in fact, that houses notorious sex offender and child killer Darren Scott Ray. That is right. This person was considered so dangerous that police had to follow him around everywhere he went when he was released for just 72 hours, yet he lives in a jail without fences and with a little slice of paradise, having comforts like a tennis court, a beautiful kitchen and all the freedom in the world.
The Liberals bungled this with Bill C-83 and their “least restrictive” measure. Why is it that somebody who is a child-killing sex offender who needs to be supervised every single minute can live in a place without fences?
Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month
Mr. Speaker, May is MS Awareness Month, and Canada has some of the highest rates of MS in the world, with 12 people diagnosed every single day in Canada.
This year focuses on the invisible symptoms of MS, which often lead to misunderstandings and barriers. For people who are living with MS, such as my wife Kyla, a lot of this has to do with severe fatigue. This is connected with sensory issues, chronic pain such as the MS hug, and mental or emotional symptoms. This all goes hand in hand with MS being unpredictable and inconsistent. As an episodic disability, it has a range of symptoms that fluctuate, with relapses and flare-ups.
Despite these special challenges, the MS community continues to move forward. This month brings an important opportunity to raise awareness and show support for an important cause, with the May 50K fundraiser. Members can find more information on the MS Canada website.
I also want to highlight MS Canada's call for the disability tax credit to be modernized, including updates for the eligibility criteria to better reflect episodic illnesses. Not all disabilities are visible, and just because we cannot see them, they are no less worthy of our support.
Sport
Mr. Speaker, as a proud life member of the Belleville Bulldogs rugby club, I know first-hand the value of amateur sport in building confidence, discipline and strong communities. That is why I welcome the spring economic update's generational investment in Canadian sport: $755 million over five years and $118 million going forward to strengthen sport funding across Canada.
In my recent meeting with representatives from Swimming Canada, they were thrilled with this commitment. CEO Suzanne Paulins called it a meaningful step that will create lasting opportunities for athletes, coaches and communities across Canada. For Swimming Canada, this funding can help restore and expand initiatives for Olympic funding and Paralympic athletes and address one of the biggest barriers local swim clubs face: access to facilities.
This is truly smart public investment: stronger grassroots sport funding and stronger high-performance pathways from playground to podium.
Affordability
Mr. Speaker, despite the illusions and speeches, it is more cost, more carbon taxes and more of the same. In Skeena—Bulkley Valley, gas prices are up to two dollars a litre. The Liberals claim that gas prices are due to world oil prices being $100 a barrel, but in 2014, under the Conservative government, gas prices were around 45¢ cheaper, and the price of oil at the time was $100 a barrel.
It is Liberal policies that are hurting the hard-working people of northwest B.C. It is high Liberal taxes and our weak dollar, because of our weak economy. The loonie is down 20% compared to 2014. When we have a weak dollar, every internationally priced commodity, like energy and food, costs more. Why is our dollar weak? It is because Liberal policies blocking resource development are scaring away investment.
The Prime Minister should take our common-sense plan to remove all taxes on all gas all year, unblock our oil and gas production, and make Canada affordable and strong.
Vyshyvanka Day
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the incredible contributions of the Ukrainian community in London, Ontario, and in particular the Ukrainian Centre and the Ukrainian Canadian Congress of London.
As we mark Vyshyvanka Day, a celebration of heritage, resilience and identity, we honour not only tradition but action. In London, Ukrainian Canadians have opened their doors, organized support networks and welcomed families fleeing war with compassion and dignity. They have raised funds, sent humanitarian aid and stood firmly with Ukraine in its fight for freedom. Their work strengthens our community here at home while making a difference abroad.
I thank all those involved, all of our friends, Daria and many more, for showing us what solidarity truly looks like. I want to wish them all a happy celebration on Vyshyvanka Day.
Finance
Mr. Speaker, imagine someone who just kept racking up the credit card bill while actively trying to earn less money. That is what the Liberals have spent the last decade doing, as they consistently increase the debt on the national credit card while doing everything possible to keep resources in the ground. Of course, governments and people are different. Governments can keep racking up taxes on families. These families are feeling the pain of higher taxes, higher inflation, higher interest costs and higher stresses on the family budget.
Despite the illusions with the Liberal Prime Minister, it is more cost, more taxes, more debt, more on the national credit card and more of the same. He is just another Liberal.
When will the Liberal Prime Minister get serious and end his costly credit card budgeting so Canadians can afford to live?
[Translation]
Students from École Jean XXIII
Mr. Speaker, today I want to welcome to Parliament the grade six students from the École Jean XXIII in La Prairie. I have seen their eyes light up. They are curious. They want to learn. They are interested in democracy and want to contribute to making Canada a sovereign country.
We chatted about the work we do here in Parliament, about the bills that have had or will have positive effects on their lives. We talked about programs like the Canada groceries and essentials benefit, through which families will receive $1,900 this year. We also talked about the national school food program, which ensures that children have a full belly so they can learn, and the support for skilled trades programs, which will help them find a good job when they are older.
Let us have faith in the future. One day, a young person, like the students from École Jean XXIII, will sit in my seat and take up the torch so that Canada remains a fair and inclusive country.
[English]
Immigration
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister claims to have taken back control of the immigration system, but that is really hard to believe. That is because in the past year, the Prime Minister has allowed the government to let in hundreds of thousands of new non-citizen temporary foreign workers while Canadian kids cannot find jobs or a place to rent. The Liberals have allowed massive, scandalous fraud to run rampant in the non-citizen student visa program. They have turned a blind eye to non-citizens convicted of serious crimes in Canada, who are getting sweetheart deals to avoid deportation. They have lost track of millions of non-citizens who have no legal reason to be in Canada, and they are issuing visas to terrorists.
The immigration minister told us she meets with the Prime Minister on a weekly basis to discuss her file. That must mean that she is following his orders. There is no other plausible reason that a minister with this many failures under her belt would still have her job. The reality is that the buck stops with the Prime Minister. He needs to fire her and fix the system, not claim that everything is okay when it is not.
Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada
Mr. Speaker,
Seems the opposition leader finds himself in a jam
When yesterday he referred to “green eggs and ham”.
Now, over on this side, we don't think it's a crime
To talk about politics in the form of a rhyme.
And to tell you the truth, we were starting to fret
Since the leadership review, he's been missing the net.
After his brilliant appearance on air with Joe Rogan
He's been unable to land even one catchy slogan.
He's often accused of being a Trumper
Cuz his policy depth fits on a car bumper.
He scores well with bots, the streamers and trolls
But his numbers are like Trump's when it comes to the polls.
So in a gesture of kindness, we'll try to be nice
We'd like to keep him as leader, so here's some advice:
Don't try to talk tough, or be awkwardly formal
Surrender yourself, and just try to act normal.
Oral Questions
[Oral Questions]
[English]
Finance
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Prime Minister's $1-trillion debt means more taxes, more costs and more of the same. After 11 years of Liberals, Canadians are now paying more on interest on our national debt than the government collects on GST and spends on health care.
Why will the Liberals not follow our Conservative plan to cut all gas taxes for the rest of the year? Is it because they have lost control of their spending, or is it because they simply do not care?
Mr. Speaker, despite the Conservative leader and his party's best efforts to mislead Canadians about the economy, let us look at some facts—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
I am still parsing that phrase, but I want to remind members that we cannot insinuate that somebody is intentionally misleading the House. I do not know if that was the case.
The member may continue.
Mr. Speaker, despite that leader and his party's best effort to paint the wrong narrative, the facts are very clear: best net debt-to-GDP in the G7, strongest fiscal position in the G7, second-fastest growing economy in the G7. Wages are outpacing inflation. Despite the rhetoric on that side, Canadians know our economy is growing. We are going to build—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Speaker, we can follow the money and we will know what the Liberal government really cares about. It has wasted $750 million on a failed gun grab, $300 million on the PrescribeIT scandal, $80 billion on interest payments for bankers and bondholders and over half a million dollars on the Prime Minister's catering on flights. What was he having, gold flakes on his cappuccinos?
Why will the Liberals not cut all taxes on gas for the rest of the year? Is it because they care more about Liberal insiders than everyday Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, it has been several days, if not weeks, since we asked the Conservatives to table a list of programs they would like to cut, things that they label “inflationary spending”. The possibilities are old age security, the Canada child benefit, the school food program, support to our workers, building the country, building major projects and building it strong. Which of these things are inflationary spending in the eyes of the Conservative Party?
Health
Mr. Speaker, once again the Prime Minister is padding the pockets of consultants, insiders and elites while Canadians pay the price for his costly credit card budget. The Liberals blew $300 million on PrescribeIT with nothing to show for it. They said they were going to axe the fax, but instead they just embraced the waste. Now we learn that the health minister paid the Liberal-appointed head of the program $900,000 per year. No wonder they shut down a committee investigation into it.
When will the Prime Minister cut the waste, cut the corruption and look out for ordinary Canadians for a change?
Mr. Speaker, we have a new winner: most empty slogans in one single question, which was just won by the member across.
The thing the Conservatives could deliver, the thing I think Canadians would appreciate, the thing that would add to the substance of this debate, is whether he will cut the empty slogans and table that list of things that they think are inflationary spending and that they would cut and deprive Canadians of.
Aerospace Industry
Mr. Speaker, we also have a new record: the most hot air from a transport minister.
The Liberals rejected Conservative calls to axe all federal taxes on fuel and save Canadians 25¢ a litre at the pumps. Let us look at what the Liberals do have money for: $200 million for a gravel pit, or, sorry, a launch pad, when the only thing the Liberals are sending into the stratosphere is the national debt.
When will the Prime Minister let real Canadians get ahead instead of just Liberal cronies?
Mr. Speaker, establishing Canadian sovereign space launch capabilities is going to drive billions of dollars in investments. It is going to create good-paying jobs. It is going to increase Canada's sovereignty. It is going to reduce our economy's reliance on the United States. It is going to support a commercial space launch and re-entry industry that could be worth up to $40 billion. This is what we are investing in.
What I hear on the other side is what I heard from Harper, slash and burn.
[Translation]
Finance
Mr. Speaker, while Quebeckers are cutting back on their groceries to make ends meet, we found out that the Prime Minister spent a cool $524,000 on food aboard his plane.
How can the Prime Minister still look Canadians in the eye and talk to them about inflation when he spends the equivalent of several years of a family's wages on a single flight, while adding to their grocery bills with his fuel tax?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of airplanes, the Prime Minister is in Mirabel this afternoon to announce the largest order in our country's history for airplanes designed, built and delivered by Canada. This is excellent news for Quebec. It is excellent news for the workers in Mirabel. It is a strong vote of confidence in the strength and vitality of the Canadian economy.
Mr. Speaker, the truth is that the Liberal government is collecting record taxes on gas and profiting from oil revenues. However, rather than easing the pressure on Canadians' wallets, that money seems to be disappearing into the pockets of Liberal insiders.
When will the Prime Minister stop treating the national budget like a credit card with no limit?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about easing the pressure on Canadians' wallets. The first thing that we did when we took office was to cut taxes for 22 million Canadians. There is also the Canada groceries and essentials benefit, which is soon coming into effect. The first payments will be issued on June 5. That will mean up to $1,800 for 12 million of the most vulnerable Canadians in the country. We are not stopping there. There is also the Canadian dental care plan, the Canada child benefit and the 10¢-a-litre break on gas prices.
My colleague talked about the Prime Minister's travels. Canada has signed 20 trade and security agreements on four continents. These are contracts in Canada. There was a trade surplus in March. As my colleague was saying, this is also the biggest contract in the history of Airbus in Canada.
Small Business
Mr. Speaker, a month ago today, Donald Trump made utterly indefensible changes to his tariffs. Desjardins has shown that Quebeckers are the ones paying the price. Quebec is being hit twice as hard as the rest of the country.
A quarter of our manufactured goods are now affected. The employers of 170,000 Quebeckers have been targeted since April 6. That is why Quebeckers need a wage subsidy, to protect jobs and offer businesses some relief.
We have been asking for this for a month now. When is the government going to take action?
Mr. Speaker, we just announced one-time assistance. It consists of cashflow support for manufacturers and SMEs affected by the U.S. administration's unfair and unjustified tariffs.
Today, we have good news. As I just mentioned, the Prime Minister is in Mirabel right now to announce the largest aircraft order in Canadian history. The aircraft is one designed and built here in Canada by Canadians. We are extremely proud of that. That is going to help Quebec's economy.
Mr. Speaker, no one is going to refuse the support, but it is poorly targeted. To quote the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec, “For businesses whose survival is currently in jeopardy, this is not enough.”
When support measures leave the most vulnerable businesses behind, I would not call that a success. That is a failure. As Desjardins has shown, the businesses most at risk are disproportionately those in Quebec. Quebeckers are the ones at risk.
When will a wage subsidy be introduced to protect them?
Mr. Speaker, a one-time boost of $1.5 billion is not insignificant. It also comes on top of the one-time assistance we have provided to the forestry industry and other industries in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada.
I would be remiss if I did not draw attention to the Bloc Québécois's silence in response to the aircraft order. The first thing they should have done today was rise in the House and congratulate this government and Airbus on that order. The second thing they should be doing is support Alto, which will help industries and SMEs across Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, the SMEs at risk of closing because of the tariffs do not need more loans. They need wage subsidies and direct support, without incurring debt. We do not want to be the bearer of bad news, but the crisis is far from over. Businesses are currently surviving thanks to contracts signed before the new tariffs took effect. Under the new tariffs, they are no longer competitive, and there will be no new contracts. The current crisis has not peaked. It is just the beginning, and the federal government must act now.
Will the government improve its support measures to protect small businesses, please?
Mr. Speaker, we will always be there to support the workers and businesses affected by the U.S. administration's illegal and illegitimate tariffs. We have been there from the beginning and we have stepped up our efforts even more recently with the $1.5 billion that was announced by the Minister of Industry on top of the $5 billion that had already been announced, specifically to help our businesses and our small and medium-sized enterprises affected by tariffs. We will always stand by the workers.
[English]
Finance
Mr. Speaker, Canadians were told the Prime Minister was a financial mastermind, but it turns out he is just more of the same. He is simply Justin Trudeau with a better LinkedIn account. He found the government credit card and treated it like a hotel mini-bar, grabbing whatever he wanted and sticking Canadians with the bill. The Prime Minister acts like the government can spend endlessly without consequence, but it is clear that families are paying the price through higher taxes, higher inflation, higher interest costs and higher prices for gas, groceries and housing.
When will the Liberal Prime Minister stop running up the tab so Canadians can afford to live again?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians sent the new Liberal government here to get things done, and that is what we are doing. The Manitobans I am talking to want to talk about affordable child care; grocery rebates; automatic tax filings, which remove barriers for northern remote communities; cutting taxes at the pump; and creating a national school food program, so children do not go hungry. The member opposite needs to stop misinforming Canadians and recognize what we are actually doing.
Mr. Speaker, I wish the minister would come to my riding to talk to the people who are sick and tired of the government overreaching and spending more money than it has year over year. The reality is that the Prime Minister is just the same, except he is a sequel. We all know what sequels are; they are worse than the first.
This year, Canadians will spend over $58 billion just to pay interest on our national debt. That is more than the GST brings in and more than the federal government transfers to provinces to deliver health care.
When will the Liberal Prime Minister stop making excuses for higher bills, stop the government bloat and stop driving up the cost of living for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, it is extremely important to talk about what we do invest in, and farmers are what we are investing in. We have invested more than $1.5 million toward initiatives that will help farmers and processors. We have the productivity superdeduction to boost productivity and encourage innovation. We also recently announced $27 million for the youth employment and skills program. These are important programs that are going to help our farmers, producers and ranchers across the country, and we will continue to support them.
Taxation
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister of illusions delivers more of the same, including more costs and more carbon taxes, because he is just another Liberal. Last week in Oshawa, gas hit 189.9¢. Before these Liberal illusionists start blaming global factors yet again, let us be clear that, under the Conservatives 12 years ago, when world oil prices were the same, gas in Oshawa was almost 50¢ cheaper. This is a Liberal legacy.
When will the Prime Minister stop delivering illusions and instead adopt our plan to reduce all the gas tax for the entire year?
Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should say that, if we are focused on illusions, the Conservatives are delusional. I am thinking of a group therapist I could refer to them.
While Conservatives wail and scream in the House every day and claim to care about affordability, our government is taking tangible measures and steps toward cutting taxes and alleviating the cost of living pressures on Canadians. We have suspended the excise tax on fuel, cut the consumer carbon tax, cut the income tax for 22 million Canadians, capped the excise tax on alcohol, cut taxes for mineral and critical mineral exploration, cut taxes for businesses to invest in—
Mr. Speaker, the member for Whitby can call me delusional, but he is clearly not living in the real world. If global oil prices were the same 12 years ago, and Canadians were paying 45¢ less, then they clearly do not explain today's sky-high gas prices. Our gas prices are a made-in-Canada problem, driven by the Liberals' newly named carbon tax and a weak dollar caused by a weak economy.
Will the Liberals take our common-sense plan, unblock our oil and gas production and make Canada affordable and strong at home?
Mr. Speaker, the reason for high gas prices is a war in Iran. They do not seem to understand this—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives appear to have omitted the basic fact of why oil prices have spiked, and that is that we have a conflict in the Middle East, in Iran. The Strait of Hormuz is presently closed, taking 20% of global oil capacity off of the market. Canada, for its part, has reduced the price of fuel by reducing taxes by 28¢ over the last year.
Automotive Industry
Mr. Speaker, I have breaking news. Reports say that Honda has scrapped plans to build a new $15-billion EV plant in Alliston, at the cost of thousands of jobs. This is a direct result of Liberal policies that forced Canadian automakers to make cars that Canadians do not want. They are now spending $2.3 billion to fund rebates on foreign-made EVs.
With no consumer demand and no CUSMA deal in sight, it is no wonder manufacturers are walking away.
Why are Canadian auto workers paying the price for the Liberals' failed auto policies?
Mr. Speaker, we know that tariffs are affecting the industry globally, but we also know that we have a very strong plant in Alliston, with 4,100 workers. They recently rolled off their 11 millionth car, making the popular CR-V and Civic brands.
We also know that we need to be there for our sector, which is why we are investing in workers. We are embracing a sustainable future, and we are attracting new investment, which I will be happy to get into in the supplementary.
Mr. Speaker, they cannot blame market shifts for their own failures. The Liberal government told us for years that the future is EVs. They just did not tell us that it was Chinese EVs. The government should be making it cheaper for Canadians to buy the cars they want to drive, built by Canadians. Instead, the Liberal policies are killing auto jobs and investment while subsidizing foreign-made electric vehicles, such as the 49,000 imported from China this year.
Will the Liberals admit that they are choosing Chinese automakers over Canadian workers?
Mr. Speaker, the head of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, on Monday, at committee, said that the rebate policy was a good policy and that it embraced the purchases of the kinds of vehicles Canadians want.
In terms of EVs and other kind of investments, the good news is that there is new investment coming, the PowerCo plant in St. Thomas, the NextStar facility, which has rolled off one million battery cells. We have new investments in Cambridge, Oshawa and Oakville. There are investments in St. Catharines.
Investments in our sector are happening with the government's support and because there is confidence in this industry. It is a coast-to-coast sector, with concentration in southern Ontario, and we will continue to be there for that.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is selling out Canada's auto sector and doubling down on Chinese EVs. I want to know if he will be riding in one in his motorcade.
Experts have called the EVs “rolling spy vans”, designed to feed data back to servers in China. The Prime Minister called China our greatest security threat. The government is still shipping 49,000 of them in while our own automakers are shut out.
Why is the Prime Minister compromising our national security and our auto industry to cozy up to Beijing?
Mr. Speaker, I respect the hon. member, but I am surprised that the opposition continues to run down auto workers and this sector in the midst of a trade war. We just put forward $1.5 billion to support the sector with steel, aluminum and copper, as well as auto workers.
The Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters said this is “a constructive step to help manufacturers and exporters manage through a period of significant economic uncertainty.” The Canadian Steel Producers Association said it is “essential to help pivot and realign our businesses to ensure our long-term competitiveness as we navigate this...trade war.”
[Translation]
Health
Mr. Speaker, cost overruns are a Liberal hallmark. First there was Cúram, which is now costing taxpayers $7 billion following yet another cost overrun according the economic update. Everyone has heard about ArriveCAN and Phoenix, and now there is PrescribeIT, a software designed by the federal government to meddle in health care and prescribe medication. It cost $300 million, almost eight times more than expected, and that $300 million is a complete waste because nobody is using this software and the Liberals are pulling the plug.
Why is our money going up in smoke yet again?
Mr. Speaker, I want to set the record straight for my colleague. To start, the first piece of good news, I would say, is that while it is true that the PrescribeIT program did not work across the country, it did work well in Quebec. That is the first point.
What you need to know is that this program was introduced—
Mr. Speaker, when the new government came to power, we looked at the program and saw that it was not working. We decided to put a stop to it. That is how we make good use of taxpayers' money.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are again taking advantage of their new majority, which they engineered by enticing floor crossers. This time, they are silencing the opposition with respect to PrescribeIT, a software designed to interfere with health care and prescribe medication. After wasting $300 million on it, the Liberals are abandoning it because nobody is using it.
Yesterday, in committee, I moved a motion calling on the Minister of Health to appear and explain this fiasco. The Liberals used their majority to prevent us from putting it to a vote.
Will the minister explain herself before the committee and denounce the censorship—
Finance
Mr. Speaker, let us not forget that, last year, when the internationally renowned banker ran for Prime Minister, he said that he would be careful with taxpayers' money. A year later, here are the results: The cost of living is very high, we have the worst food inflation in the G7, there are more taxes, more debt and more charges on the credit card. In short, this great banker is nothing more than a costly Liberal.
When will the Prime Minister realize that racking up up countless credit card charges is not going to create wealth for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, let us not forget that, last year, the member's leader presented a budget plan that contained over 17 photos of himself, and none of the numbers in that plan were supported by economists. That is why Canadians made the wise choice to reject the Conservatives' proposal and opt for the serious proposal put forward by this Prime Minister and this government, which has put Canada in the best fiscal position in the G7. We have the second-strongest growth in the G7 and are way ahead of the third- and fourth-place countries, while also delivering tax cuts for the middle class, support for those who need it and a strong economy.
Mr. Speaker, let us remember that a year ago, the Liberals were forecasting a $31‑billion deficit. One year later, it is twice that—$65 billion. That is the reality after one year of Liberal governance. Worse still, the outlook from now to 2031, according to the economic statement, is another trillion dollars added to the debt. More and more spending is an indication that the deficits will increase.
Do the Liberals realize that spending money we do not have leaves our children and our great-grandchildren holding the bag and that future generations will have to pay for the Liberals' irresponsible management?
Mr. Speaker, what would be irresponsible would be to do as my colleague suggests and deprive 27,000 people in his riding of the Canadian dental care plan, as well as 12,000 families of the approximately $80 million that flows into Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk. That is what would be irresponsible.
What would be irresponsible, given the global and economic turmoil we are facing, would be to fail to build and invest in infrastructure to boost Canada's competitiveness—as we are doing at the Port of Québec, as we are doing in Contrecoeur, and as we are doing with Nouveau Monde Graphite—in order to create a strong, resilient economy that offers opportunities to our youth and future generations.
Mr. Speaker, in 2024, England established a new fund that it explicitly refused to call a sovereign wealth fund because it was debt-financed, just like the fund announced by the Liberals last week. The Prime Minister should be aware of this. He served as an adviser to England during the process.
The Liberals are using a term that has proven itself, that works, and that is even appealing, but they are not using the formula that made it successful.
Why are the Prime Minister and his Minister of Finance selling us a pipe dream and continuing to saddle our country with debt? Do they think Quebeckers are stupid?
Mr. Speaker, as we build Canada strong and carry out major projects, we naturally want to give all Canadians the opportunity to be part of this effort, to participate in these projects that will create wealth and put our men and women to work, especially in the skilled trades. Yes, we will ensure that the entire country has a bigger stake in the prosperity we intend to create here in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, families in Montmorency—Charlevoix are going into debt to put food on the table. Meanwhile, the Liberals, true to form, are setting up a fund that will start out $25 billion in the hole. A true sovereign wealth fund is created with wealth, using the proceeds from resources sold on the international market. Norway, Saudi Arabia and Singapore are good examples that we should emulate. They did not rely on debt to pay for their funds.
The Prime Minister is borrowing to spend, while Quebeckers are borrowing to eat. How can the Liberals look families in the eye and say that they are managing public funds correctly and efficiently?
Mr. Speaker, just as we are doing with other programs like the Canada growth fund, indigenous participation in our projects and the Canada Infrastructure Bank, we want the sovereign wealth fund to provide the tools needed to move forward, to build and develop a new economy here in Canada. We want it to be an economy that provides job opportunities as well as opportunities to create wealth here in Canada, for Canadians.
That is what we are doing with the sovereign wealth fund for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, the national credit card is more maxed out than ever, leaving a $1-trillion bill behind for our kids and grandkids. That is $1 trillion more in 10 years being piled on the backs of future generations.
Today, families are paying the price for the Liberals' structural deficits through higher taxes, higher inflation, even higher interest costs and higher prices across the board.
When is this Liberal Prime Minister going to end credit card budgets so that Canadian families can make ends meet?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question.
What he said is not true. We are continuing to build a strong economy in Canada with trade agreements around the world. For example, we signed an agreement with Indonesia last year, and we have agreements with Indo‑Pacific countries, including ASEAN in 2026. We are going to keep building the economy through agreements like these.
I would like to know why the Conservatives refuse to vote with us in support of Canadians.
[English]
Seniors
Mr. Speaker, the seniors in our country are the very people who built the communities we live in today, who raised families, strengthened our economy and shaped the Canada we are so proud of. They deserve to age with dignity, security and peace of mind.
In Pickering—Brooklin, our seniors are concerned about affordability and ensuring they receive the benefits they rely on.
Can the secretary of state update Canadians on how our government is supporting seniors and protecting them from financial vulnerability?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Pickering—Brooklin for the great work she does in her riding and for recognizing the contributions of seniors across this country.
Canada's new government is committed to ensuring—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Order. Once it quiets down, the member may continue.
The hon. Secretary of State for Financial Institutions may continue.
Mr. Speaker, we have so many members on this side that it is hard to keep track of where everyone is.
I want to thank the member for Pickering—Brooklin for the great work she does and for recognizing seniors across this country.
Canada's new government is committed to ensuring that seniors age with dignity. We are going to make it easier for seniors to access the benefits they are entitled to.
Aerospace Industry
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals refuse to come clean about 200 million tax dollars that they handed a six-person company of Liberal insiders to lease a so-called spaceport that is really nothing more than a gravel pit. That was 200 million tax dollars to a company that does not even own the land and that leases the land from the Province of Nova Scotia for less than $20,000 a year. If taxpayers are not being ripped off, then why will the Liberals not release all of the documents surrounding this shady lease?
Mr. Speaker, once again, establishing Canadian sovereign space launch capabilities would drive billions of dollars in investments. It would create well-paying jobs. It would increase Canada's sovereignty. It would reduce our reliance on the United States. It would support a commercial space launch and re-entry industry that could be worth up to $40 billion.
European countries are lining up to work with us. This is what we are investing in. I am not sure what the Conservatives are up to at all.
Mr. Speaker, there is more. The company's 2025 financial statements recorded a comprehensive loss of $47 million, and revenue of under $15,000. In other words, the company was nearly bankrupt until the Liberals came to their rescue and handed them 200 million tax dollars to lease land that taxpayers already own.
Is the reason the Liberals will not release the documents not that it is just one big scam in which Liberal insiders are getting rich?
Mr. Speaker, it never ceases to amaze me how opposed the Conservatives are to jobs in Nova Scotia.
We have an opportunity to establish a new industry. The facility to which he points has had two test launches that have sent a rocket beyond the 100-kilometre threshold. We are bringing a new industry in rural Nova Scotia.
I ran for office to help create good opportunities in modern industries to deliver well-paying jobs for my friends, my neighbours and fellow residents of the province. If the Conservatives continue to oppose jobs in my home province, they are going to continue to have zero seats in Nova Scotia for quite some time.
Health
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals gave Canada Health Infoway $300 million for PrescribeIT, a program that they promised would replace fax machines for prescription drugs. Instead, less than 5% of the prescriptions went through the program, and PrescribeIT is now being quietly shut down with no results.
Canadians still do not know where their money went. Yesterday at the health committee, the chair of Canada Health Infoway revealed that the health minister never once raised concerns about PrescribeIT.
Why did the Liberal minister allow $300 million to be burned, without saying a word?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I will say it again. The PrescribeIT program was launched in 2017 by the previous government following consultations with the provinces and territories. When we took office last year, we assessed the program and saw that that uptake was low, so we decided to shut down the program. That is what happened, and we are saving Canadians money.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, Canadians need answers on how the Liberals burned $300 million on their failed PrescribeIT program, money that could have been spent on other health care needs. Just last week, the Liberals moved to shut off the cameras at the health committee, sealing the records of that meeting for 30 years. Yesterday, the Liberals shut down the health committee to prevent the minister from testifying.
Why is the Liberals' $300‑million PrescribeIT failure being hidden from Canadians?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I will say it again for my colleague: This program was put in place in 2017 with the participation of the provinces and territories. The program did not work the way we had hoped it would.
When I took office last year, we assessed the programs and saw that this program did not have much uptake, so we decided to end it to protect Canadians' money.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals gave $300 million to Canada Health Infoway to build PrescribeIT, which the minister now acknowledges was a total failure. However, here is the problem. The board of Canada Health Infoway only fired its million‑dollar CEO after Conservatives raised these failures at the health committee.
How much more money does the health minister plan to give this very badly run organization this year? I would like just the number of dollars, please.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the first thing I will say to my colleague is, yes, he is right, the CEO of Infoway's behaviour was unacceptable. I spoke to the board of directors, and they took the necessary steps. Now we are working on the organization's governance.
However, this year, Infoway will receive $50 million. As you know, that money is in the public accounts of the Department of Health, so you have access to those figures.
Indigenous Affairs
Mr. Speaker, Canadians watched a poorly staged performance last week when the Prime Minister responded to a simple question on private property rights from another Liberal MP. They could not even pretend to care. The fact remains that the Liberal government issued a litigation directive instructing federal lawyers to avoid protecting arguments for private property rights. That directive remains posted on the Liberal government's website today.
Is this directive still government policy and if so, will the Prime Minister withdraw it, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, preserving the certainty and stability of private property is of the utmost importance. That is why we advance all viable legal arguments to protect private property.
We disagree with the B.C. Supreme Court's ruling and that is why we appealed it back in September. We are fully committed to ensuring stability, certainty and confidence for Canadians who own property while we advance reconciliation. We will continue to pursue this matter where it belongs: in the courts and not on the floor of the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government directed its lawyers not to argue for property rights in the Cowichan case. The judge then ruled that private property was defective and invalid. Canada must pursue reconciliation with indigenous peoples, but these decisions are moving in the wrong direction. Canadians need the certainty that comes with knowing that their homes and property are theirs.
With appeals and other court cases coming, why is the Liberal Prime Minister telling his lawyers not to defend private property?
Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague well knows, this government believes in private property rights and does not view them to be mutually exclusive to the notion that we can reconcile our challenging history with indigenous peoples who call these lands home. We have been advocating for the court to notify private property owners in this case since 2017. We have more recently supported the application by Montrose to be able to advance arguments to protect private property interests.
In the meantime, we have made arguments to defend fee simple insofar as it impacts the federal government. We will defend private property rights. We will advance a path to reconciliation. We can do both at the same time.
Mr. Speaker, the Cowichan land decision and the Liberal-Musqueam agreements signed secretly and outside the treaty process have resulted in economic uncertainty, falling property values and unsettling division among British Columbians, especially on Vancouver Island.
We need truth and reconciliation. The Prime Minister is failing to deliver either. He is clearly unaware that by handcuffing the government lawyers in the B.C. appeals court, he has now legally handcuffed them in the Supreme Court.
When will the Prime Minister explain his plan to protect private property rights now that the government lawyers cannot use the private property argument in court?
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that everybody remembers that the recently signed Musqueam agreements do not affect private property. The agreements recognize the Musqueam's constitutionally protected aboriginal rights in the specific areas of fisheries, stewardship and marine emergency management, while establishing a clear framework for collaboration between the first nation and Canada. These agreements respect the rights of indigenous peoples and establish how Canada and the first nation should engage so we get our issues out of the courts and increase certainty for indigenous communities, businesses and all Canadians.
I encourage the member opposite to read the agreements.
Mr. Speaker, British Columbians bought their homes, paid their mortgages and played by the rules, but due to the Cowichan decision, they now face uncertainty as to whether their private property will be protected going forward. Instead of arguing in favour of those rights in the Cowichan case, this Liberal government told federal lawyers not to defend those rights through litigation directive number 14, a directive that is still active to this day.
How can British Columbians believe that this Liberal Prime Minister will stand up for their private property rights when his government guidelines are telling his lawyers to stand down?
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear about what the facts are. The fact is that the Prime Minister has stood and said very clearly that our government is going to protect private property rights.
Let us be clear about the facts. We have said that we are appealing the decision, which we are.
Let us also be clear that the fearmongering and misinformation coming from the other side of the House is causing uncertainty in British Columbia, not what the facts on the ground say. The facts on the ground say that we are defending private property rights. The opposition is trying to drive uncertainty and is driving problems in the housing market in British Columbia.
[Translation]
Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, for over 100 years, the organization Acfas has been helping to advance and promote research, innovation and science culture in French. Next week, it will hold its annual congress in Trois‑Rivières, with more than 260 lectures showcasing the diversity of science in French. It will be one of the largest multidisciplinary scientific gatherings in the French-speaking world.
Can the minister tell us what our government is doing to support the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Madawaska—Restigouche for his excellent question and his excellent work.
I share his appreciation for Acfas, which is carrying out critical work to promote science and research in French. That is a top priority for our government. First, on April 1, we announced $1 million in funding to promote research in French. Second, we are currently reviewing the recommendations of the advisory panel on research in French as part of the action plan for official languages 2023‑28, and we will be publishing the report shortly.
We are proud of the work of our francophone researchers.
[English]
International Trade
Mr. Speaker, Canadian farmers expect the government to defend them at the negotiation table, not leave them behind, yet the Liberals constantly fail farmers in trade disputes.
Canadian beef and pork exports to Europe and the United Kingdom dropped to zero last year, yet the Liberals are rushing into a Mercosur agreement despite the risk to Canadian cattle, pork and poultry. Mercosur countries do not meet our standards on animal health, food safety or the environment.
Why are the Liberals rushing in to sign an agreement that puts our food security, our food safety and Canadian farmers at risk?
Mr. Speaker, we are engaged in active negotiations throughout the world to create more opportunities for Canadians to create more good-paying jobs for our farmers and for our industries across Canada. That includes a negotiating agreement with Mercosur, which is the fifth-largest trading bloc in the world, with a GDP of somewhere between $3 trillion and $3.5 trillion.
In that process, we are working with farmers, we are working with industries and we are working with stakeholders. Just today, I met with the Canadian Cattle Association. The minister met with them last week.
We are working together to make sure that we create good-paying jobs for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the Bruce County and Grey County beef farmers have publicly expressed concerns about the ongoing negotiations with Mercosur. They said, “This won't just hurt farmers—it will weaken rural communities and reduce Canada's ability to produce its own food.... In Ontario...where most imported beef enters the market, the impact on local farmers would be severe.”
Canadian beef producers are waiting to get more access in markets across the world. Should the Liberal government not be prioritizing export market access abroad instead of displacing the Canadian cattle industry at home?
Mr. Speaker, that is precisely what we are doing. We are living in uncertain times, and our focus is on creating more opportunities for Canadian businesses, including our hard-working farmers, to be able to export around the world. In fact, if we talk to farmers, we hear that they are very excited about the opportunities we are creating for them in India, China, the Philippines and other ASEAN countries, and places like Mercosur.
We are working closely with our farmers. We are working closely with our industries. We are listening to their views, and our negotiations will reflect the needs of Canadians so we can create good-paying jobs for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, Canadian cattle producers are among the very best in the entire world. Our ranchers have built world-class beef genetics through generations of hard work, strict animal health standards and some of the most rigorous traceability requirements anywhere on earth. Now the Liberals are considering a Mercosur trade deal that could open the floodgates to beef imports from countries with far lower standards and production costs.
Why are these Liberals willing to sacrifice our Canadian ranchers and undermine our domestic food industry? Will the minister commit today to protecting Canadian cattle producers and exempt agriculture from any Mercosur trade deal?
Mr. Speaker, we are unlocking trade opportunities for Canadians and Canadian farmers around the world. Let us look at China. Let us look at Mexico, for example, where we are continuing to stand with Canadian farmers. At the same time, we are unlocking trade agreements and investment directly into Canada, around the world, and negotiating and concluding over 20 trade agreements over the past six months, over four continents.
One thing that would advantage Canadians is if the opposition actually recognized that we are standing for the Canadian—
Fisheries and Oceans
Mr. Speaker, my riding is proudly home to the largest lobster fishery in Canada, which creates thousands of good-paying jobs throughout Acadie—Annapolis. Our harvesters need safe and secure small craft harbours in order for their product to make it to markets.
Can the Minister of Fisheries tell me how the spring economic update will affect seafood producers?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his tireless advocacy. Small craft harbours are vital to the fisheries and vital to our coastal communities. That is why the spring economic update had almost a billion dollars in it to help support small craft. This will be a—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
There is another question period going on here.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
The Speaker: We are almost at the end. I can see it. Let us try to get across the goal line.
The hon. Minister of Fisheries. I will give her a bit of extra time, given the brouhaha.
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister claims that he has taken back control of the immigration system, but that is kind of hard to believe. In the past year, his government has let in hundreds of thousands of new temporary foreign workers while Canadians cannot find jobs. They have no way of tracking whether millions of non-citizens on expired or expiring visas will leave. Now the government is issuing visas to terrorists, and every time the minister speaks, somehow she manages to make things worse.
Why has the Prime Minister not fired her?
Mr. Speaker, as I have shared with the House before, personal attacks speak for themselves.
What do we see on this side of the House? We are working for Canadians, putting in place the platform that every single Liberal MP ran on, which is being executed now: a decline in the number of temporary residents, a decline in the number of people seeking asylum, working toward and improving the international student system, a 70% decline in the number of student permits issued since 2014, and an entry and exit system that is being strengthened in partnership with the CBSA. I could go on.
We will continue to be serious. The Conservatives can continue to play games.
Health
Mr. Speaker, legal experts just confirmed what New Democrats have been warning for months: Alberta's private health care law violates the Canada Health Act. Danielle Smith's two-tier scheme lets wealthy patients pay to jump the line, while everyone else waits longer. This breaks a core principle of public health care: access must be based on need, not ability to pay. Upholding this value is the federal government's job, but the Liberals have refused to do it.
Why is the Prime Minister doing nothing while Conservatives dismantle public health care?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, that is news to me, because I spoke with Alberta's health minister last week and the regulations have not yet been put in place. Our two departments are working together.
For the moment, I cannot say that Alberta is not complying with the Canada Health Act. I can confirm that Alberta's health minister has authorized me to say that she wants to work within the framework of the Canada Health Act.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Since I applauded the Airbus announcement on LCN this morning at 6:35 a.m., I would ask you to recognize that the Minister of Transport intentionally misled the House and, as a result, I would ask you to send him to spend some time in the Centre Block dungeons at his own expense.
Mr. Speaker, in answer to a question from the Bloc Québécois during question period, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons pointed out the Prime Minister's absence.
I would like you to either remind him of the rules or withhold his dessert when you send him to the Centre Block dungeons.
Government Orders
[Business of Supply]
[Translation]
Business of Supply
Opposition Motion—Measures to Support the Manufacturing Sector
The House resumed from May 5 consideration of the motion.
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 118)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAcan
Aitchison
Al Soud
Albas
Ali
Allison
Alty
Anand
Anandasangaree
Anstey
Arnold
Au
Auguste
Baber
Bailey
Bains
Baker
Baldinelli
Bardeesy
Barlow
Barrett
Barsalou-Duval
Battiste
Beaulieu
Beech
Begum
Belanger (Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River)
Bélanger (Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt)
Bendayan
Berthold
Bexte
Bezan
Bittle
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Block
Blois
Bonin
Borrelli
Boulerice
Bragdon
Brassard
Brière
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Caputo
Carney
Carr
Casey
Chagger
Chambers
Champagne
Champoux
Chang
Chartrand
Chatel
Chen
Chenette
Chi
Chong
Church
Clark
Cobena
Cody
Connors
Cooper
Cormier
Coteau
Dabrusin
Dalton
Dancho
Dandurand
Danko
Davidson
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Davies (Niagara South)
Dawson
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
d'Entremont
DeRidder
Deschênes
Deschênes-Thériault
Desrochers
Dhaliwal
Dhillon
Diotte
Doherty
Dowdall
Duclos
Duguid
Duncan
Dzerowicz
Earle
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Epp
Erskine-Smith
Eyolfson
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake)
Falk (Provencher)
Fancy
Fanjoy
Fergus
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fortin
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Gallant
Garon
Gasparro
Gaudreau
Gazan
Généreux
Genuis
Gerretsen
Gill (Calgary Skyview)
Gill (Brampton West)
Gill (Calgary McKnight)
Gill (Windsor West)
Gill (Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan)
Gill (Abbotsford—South Langley)
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gould
Gourde
Grant
Greaves
Groleau
Guay
Guglielmin
Guilbeault
Gull-Masty
Gunn
Hajdu
Hallan
Hanley
Hardy
Harrison
Hepfner
Hirtle
Ho
Hoback
Hodgson
Hogan
Holman
Housefather
Hussen
Iacono
Idlout
Jackson
Jaczek
Jansen
Jivani
Johns
Joly
Joseph
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Kelly
Khalid
Khanna
Kibble
Kirkland
Klassen
Kmiec
Konanz
Koutrakis
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kronis
Kuruc
Kusie
Kwan
Lake
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lantsman
Lapointe (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles)
Lapointe (Sudbury)
Larouche
Lattanzio
Lauzon
Lavack
Lavoie
Lawrence
Lawton
LeBlanc
Lefebvre
Leitão
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Lightbound
Lloyd
Lobb
Long
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
Ma
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacDonald (Cardigan)
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Mahal
Majumdar
Malette (Bay of Quinte)
Malette (Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk)
Maloney
Mantle
Martel
Martin
May
Mazier
McCauley
McGuinty
McKelvie
McKenzie
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McKnight
McLean (Calgary Centre)
McLean (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke)
McPherson
Melillo
Ménard
Mendès
Menegakis
Michel
Miedema
Miller
Mingarelli
Moore
Morin
Morrison
Morrissey
Motz
Muys
Myles
Naqvi
Nater
Nathan
Nguyen
Noormohamed
Normandin
Ntumba
Oliphant
Olszewski
O'Rourke
Osborne
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Perron
Petitpas Taylor
Plamondon
Poilievre
Powlowski
Provost
Ramsay
Rana
Reid
Rempel Garner
Reynolds
Richards
Roberts
Robertson
Rochefort
Romanado
Rood
Ross
Rowe
Royer
Ruff
Sahota
Saini
Sarai
Sari
Savard-Tremblay
Sawatzky
Scheer
Schiefke
Schmale
Seeback
Sgro
Sheehan
Shipley
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Simard
Small
Sodhi
Solomon
Sousa
Steinley
Ste-Marie
Stevenson
St-Pierre
Strahl
Strauss
Stubbs
Sudds
Tesser Derksen
Thériault
Thompson
Tochor
Tolmie
Turnbull
Uppal
Valdez
van Koeverden
Van Popta
Vandenbeld
Vien
Viersen
Villeneuve
Wagantall
Warkentin
Watchorn
Waugh
Weiler
Wilkinson
Williamson
Yip
Zahid
Zerucelli
Zimmer
Zuberi
Total: -- 333
NAYS
NilPAIRED
Members
AndersonDiab
Fuhr
Redekopp
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Vis
Total: -- 6
Routine Proceedings
[Routine Proceedings]
[English]
Government Response to Petitions
[Translation]
Interparliamentary Delegations
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, five reports of the Canadian section of the Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group, also called the Group.
[English]
The first concerns the interparliamentary group's participation at the 78th annual meeting of the Council of State Governments Southern Legislative Conference in Greenville, West Virginia, from July 21 to 25, 2024.
The second concerns the IPG's participation at the Pacific Northwest Economic Region's 33rd annual summit in Whistler, British Columbia, from July 21 to 25, 2024.
The third concerns the IPG's participation at the 63rd annual meeting of the CSG Eastern Regional Conference in Baltimore, Maryland, from July 28 to 31, 2024.
The fourth concerns the IPG's contributions to the National Conference of State Legislatures annual meeting in Louisville, Kentucky, from August 5 to 7, 2024.
The fifth and final report concerns the IPG's participation in the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Illinois, from August 19 to 22, 2024.
Committees of the House
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, entitled “Science in Canadian Agriculture and the Closure of Research Centres”.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, in reference to the study that is being tabled by my colleague, I think it is very important to highlight that of the recommendations in that report, which were unanimously supported by all parties, there is a recommendation to reverse the closures of those—
[Translation]
[English]
Environment and Sustainable Development
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, in relation to Bill C-241.
Pursuant to Standing Order 97.1(1), the committee is requesting a single extension of 30 sitting days to hear from the bill's sponsor.
Regulating the Online Use of Deepfakes Act
He said: Mr. Speaker, AI is advancing quickly, and more risks are emerging for Canadians. Deepfakes can now create highly realistic images, videos and audio that falsely represent a person without their knowledge or consent. These tools can be used for fraud, identity theft, harassment, intimidation and other forms of abuse, causing serious emotional, reputational and financial harm.
At its core, this bill is about a simple principle. People should have control over their own image, voice and face. No one should have their identity digitally copied, manipulated or used in a way that misrepresents or exploits them.
Canadians deserve transparency, accountability and trust online. This bill would help Canadians feel that their dignity, privacy and personal autonomy are safe in a digital age. It would require online platforms to identify deepfakes, create user reporting mechanisms, clearly label deepfake content and take reasonable steps to prevent and remove harmful deepfakes.
We know technology is advancing quickly. Let us ensure that the rights and dignity of all Canadians are not being outpaced by that growth.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Petitions
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition brought forth by many residents of Saskatchewan, as well as across the country, with the purpose of seeking the enforcement of the federal government's coal phase-out regulations in Saskatchewan.
The petitioners would like to bring to the attention of the House that they have submitted a request to have the Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature take the necessary measures within federal jurisdiction to prevent the continued operation of coal-fired electricity generation. They seek clarity on the specific steps being undertaken to ensure compliance with federal regulations.
Mr. Speaker, I have yet another petition from concerned residents of the Indian Head area on the closure of the research farm. The Liberal minister is trying to claim he can close this farm down and relocate it, but what he must not understand is that this particular site at Indian Head has over 100 years of soil data.
This is an integral part of the agricultural research network across Canada. The centre itself provides jobs for the people in Indian Head. It also provides hundreds of millions of dollars in value to our agricultural producers because of the innovations and advancements it can make in crop health and pest and drought resistance.
The petitioners urge the government to abandon its plans and reverse its decision to shut down this research centre.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition to the Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature.
The long-tailed macaque is the most heavily traded primate for experimental use and was uplisted to “endangered” by the IUCN in 2022. Despite the species' endangered status, Canada has allowed the import of over 10,000 macaques from Cambodia between 2023 and 2025. Environment and Climate Change Canada stated in a response to e-petition 6537 that it has seen no evidence of falsified permits.
Therefore, 5,274 signatures have been obtained from citizens and residents of Canada calling upon the Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature to launch an investigation into the legality, traceability and authenticity of the CITES permits used for the importation of Cambodian long-tailed macaques into Canada under the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act.
The petitioners also request that long-tailed macaques be added to schedule II of the WAPTR to enable the ministry to require and assess its own import permits.
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise on behalf of many Canadians who are expressing concern about a proposed over-the-horizon radar field that is set to be put in Clearview Township, which is very close to Simcoe North. The petitioners ask the government to stop building the over-the-horizon radar site on the already purchased property; prevent future acquisition of prime farmland and the building of any other over-the-horizon radar sites on this prime farmland in Clearview Township; and finally, register the previously purchased property with the Ontario Farmland Trust to preserve its agricultural status.
Mr. Speaker, I am deeply honoured today to table petition e-7025. This petition, initiated by a concerned Canadian from Glencoe in my riding of Middlesex—London, calls on Parliament to amend the Parliament of Canada Act. It asks that any member of Parliament who crosses the floor to join another party must vacate their seat and trigger a by-election in their riding.
This is important because Canadians elect MPs under a specific party banner to represent their values and priorities. Unrestricted or unintentionally sought-out floor crossings erode voter trust and undermine the democratic will of the constituency each MP represents. I am proud to stand for greater accountability alongside the 111,158 Canadians from across the country who signed in support of this important call to strengthen our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the people's House to present this petition on behalf of the great citizens of Nova Scotia and Canadians from coast to coast who are calling upon the Government of Canada to pause its planned closure of the important agricultural research facility in Nappan, Nova Scotia. The research facility does incredible work for our beef producers, livestock producers and 4-H producers across the country, especially in the Atlantic region. With this petition, they are hereby calling upon the government to pause its planned closure and to listen and engage meaningfully with the agriculture producers and residents of those rural communities.
Mr. Speaker, the issue in the petition I am presenting today was initially raised in one of my town hall meetings some months ago. As some may know, Saanich—Gulf Islands happens to be a riding that has a particularly high percentage of senior residents. The petitioners from Saanich—Gulf Islands are very concerned and raise an issue that I think is Canada-wide, which is that the headlights for automobiles have changed dramatically over the years. The LED lights, with their current intensity in many automobiles, are a hazard, particularly for older drivers, as it is hard for them to see where they are going. This is because of the lack of street lighting and the halogen vehicle headlights, which are extremely bright.
The petitioners, therefore, ask the House of Commons to review and update federal motor vehicle safety standards related to headlight brightness. They ask for a report to be commissioned and independent research on the impact on road safety as a result of these high-intensity lights. They also ask to strengthen testing, compliance and enforcement to ensure that headlights do not produce excessive glare under normal operating conditions. The petitioners ask that the federal government work with provinces, territories, road safety experts and vehicle manufacturers to address this safety threat.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to table this petition today signed by many independent fish harvesters on Vancouver Island and coastal British Columbia who are concerned about the concentration of foreign ownership of fishing quota. Only in British Columbia is this allowed.
The petitioners highlight that DFO's mandate includes promoting the stability and economic viability of fishing operations; that Canadian owner-operator fish harvesters are increasingly displaced by foreign acquisition of Canada's commercial fishing licences and quotas; that Canada does not currently have any limitation on foreign ownership of commercial fishing licences and quotas in the Pacific region; that Canada does not record or track citizenship within transactions of fishing licences and quotas; and that the absence of restrictions on foreign ownership on commercial fishing licences and quotas damages the economic viability of Canadian-owned fishing operations, harvesters and their families, and coastal communities.
The foreign ownership of commercial fishing access compromises domestic food security and is directly linked to economic losses of domestic fish processing and processing jobs here in Canada. They are calling on the Government of Canada to immediately ban any further transfer of Canadian commercial fishing licences and quotas to foreign ownership or foreign beneficial interest.
Questions Passed as Orders for Return
Is it agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
[For text of questions and responses, see Written Questions website]
Motions for Papers
Government Orders
[Government Orders]
[English]
Ways and Means
Hon. Joël Lightbound (for the Minister of Finance and National Revenue)
moved that a ways and means motion to introduce a bill entitled A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, be concurred in.
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.
[Translation]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 119)
YEAS
Members
AcanAl Soud
Ali
Alty
Anand
Anandasangaree
Auguste
Bains
Baker
Bardeesy
Battiste
Beech
Begum
Belanger (Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River)
Bendayan
Bittle
Blois
Brière
Carney
Carr
Casey
Chagger
Champagne
Chang
Chartrand
Chatel
Chen
Chenette
Chi
Church
Clark
Connors
Cormier
Coteau
Dabrusin
Dandurand
Danko
d'Entremont
Deschênes-Thériault
Desrochers
Dhaliwal
Dhillon
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Earle
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Eyolfson
Fancy
Fanjoy
Fergus
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Gasparro
Gerretsen
Gladu
Gould
Grant
Greaves
Guay
Guilbeault
Gull-Masty
Hajdu
Hanley
Harrison
Hepfner
Hirtle
Hodgson
Hogan
Housefather
Hussen
Iacono
Idlout
Jaczek
Jeneroux
Joly
Joseph
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Klassen
Koutrakis
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles)
Lapointe (Sudbury)
Lattanzio
Lauzon
Lavack
Lavoie
LeBlanc
Leitão
Lightbound
Long
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
Ma
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacDonald (Cardigan)
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Malette (Bay of Quinte)
Maloney
Martin
McGuinty
McKelvie
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McKnight
McLean (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke)
Ménard
Mendès
Michel
Miedema
Miller
Mingarelli
Morrissey
Myles
Naqvi
Nathan
Nguyen
Noormohamed
Ntumba
Oliphant
Olszewski
O'Rourke
Osborne
Petitpas Taylor
Powlowski
Provost
Ramsay
Rana
Robertson
Rochefort
Romanado
Royer
Sahota
Saini
Sarai
Sari
Sawatzky
Schiefke
Sgro
Sheehan
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Sodhi
Solomon
Sousa
St-Pierre
Sudds
Tesser Derksen
Thompson
Turnbull
Valdez
van Koeverden
Vandenbeld
Villeneuve
Watchorn
Weiler
Wilkinson
Yip
Zahid
Zerucelli
Zuberi
Total: -- 170
NAYS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Anstey
Arnold
Au
Baber
Bailey
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Barsalou-Duval
Beaulieu
Bélanger (Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt)
Berthold
Bexte
Bezan
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Block
Bonin
Bonk
Borrelli
Boulerice
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Caputo
Chambers
Champoux
Chong
Cobena
Cody
Cooper
Dalton
Dancho
Davidson
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Davies (Niagara South)
Dawson
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
DeRidder
Deschênes
Diotte
Doherty
Dowdall
Duncan
Epp
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake)
Falk (Provencher)
Fortin
Gallant
Garon
Gaudreau
Gazan
Généreux
Genuis
Gill (Calgary Skyview)
Gill (Brampton West)
Gill (Calgary McKnight)
Gill (Windsor West)
Gill (Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan)
Gill (Abbotsford—South Langley)
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Groleau
Guglielmin
Gunn
Hallan
Hardy
Ho
Hoback
Holman
Jackson
Jansen
Jivani
Johns
Kelly
Khanna
Kibble
Kirkland
Kmiec
Konanz
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kronis
Kuruc
Kusie
Kwan
Lake
Lantsman
Larouche
Lawrence
Lawton
Lefebvre
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Lloyd
Lobb
Mahal
Majumdar
Malette (Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk)
Mantle
Martel
May
Mazier
McCauley
McKenzie
McLean (Calgary Centre)
McPherson
Melillo
Menegakis
Moore
Morin
Morrison
Motz
Muys
Nater
Normandin
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Perron
Plamondon
Poilievre
Reid
Rempel Garner
Reynolds
Richards
Roberts
Rood
Ross
Rowe
Ruff
Savard-Tremblay
Scheer
Schmale
Seeback
Shipley
Simard
Small
Steinley
Ste-Marie
Stevenson
Strahl
Strauss
Stubbs
Thériault
Tochor
Tolmie
Uppal
Van Popta
Vien
Viersen
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Williamson
Zimmer
Total: -- 165
PAIRED
Members
AndersonDiab
Fuhr
Redekopp
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Vis
Total: -- 6
[English]
Hon. Heath MacDonald (for the Minister of Finance and National Revenue)
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-31, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025.(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act
The House resumed from May 1 consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update tabled in Parliament on April 28, 2026, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.
Mr. Speaker, to conclude my earlier speech on Bill C-30, the Liberals brag about $37 billion in spending, but they should walk into any grocery store in Long Range Mountains and ask families how they are managing. They do not want to hear about billions for international conferences. They want to know how they can afford to drive their kids to hockey or keep food on the table. Seniors on fixed incomes are falling behind. Entrepreneurs are wondering how to make payroll instead of how to grow.
At a time when we should be bringing costs down, this bill proposes a sovereign wealth fund with no wealth behind it, only borrowed money. The cost of servicing the Liberal debt will reach $59 billion this year. That is more than the federal government transfers for health care, and it costs every Canadian family $3,400 just to cover the interest. Despite this unprecedented spending, our economic fundamentals are weakening. We face some of the worst indicators in the G7: high debt, unaffordable housing and weak productivity.
Newfoundland and Labrador has the resource potential to be a global energy superpower, but we have been held back by a Liberal wall of regulatory bottlenecks and a punishing industrial carbon price.
Conservatives believe Canada can do better. We believe in fiscal responsibility, lower taxes and unlocking our natural resources so that Canadians benefit from our country's wealth. We have enormous resource potential, but we need the government to get out of the way so Newfoundlanders and Labradorians can do what we have always done: work hard and provide for our families.
Canadians are not asking for more Liberal empty announcements. They are asking for a government that understands the pressures they face and their realities. The people of Long Range Mountains are resilient. We have survived the hardest winters and the toughest seas, but we should not have to survive the Liberal government's costly credit card economic policies.
Bill C-30 fails to provide relief or a sustainable path forward. Therefore, I cannot support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing that the Conservative Party of Canada does not recognize fantastic programs that have been a part of Canadian society for many years. I am talking about the Red Seal program. Under the Red Seal program, this government and this Prime Minister have made a commitment that we are going to see anywhere from 80,000 to 100,000 new skilled professional Red Seal recipients. This is good news, in particular for young people.
On the one hand, the Conservative Party says that we need to do things for young people. When we do things for young people, the Conservative Party consistently votes against it. Does the Conservative Party of today, the far-right Conservative, support the Red Seal program?
Mr. Speaker, the member across the way consistently stands up in this House and is always the person to ask questions of members opposite.
However, if we do not have an economy that has opportunities for our young people, we can train them all we want but at the end of the day there is no job for them to go to. In Newfoundland and Labrador, we have enormous resource potential, but we have an out-migration problem because we have not developed our natural resources sector to be able to retain our people in our communities. We need to talk about how we can unleash our untapped potential in order to provide some opportunities for our young people.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from my Liberal colleague in terms of the $6-billion plan to recruit and train 100,000 new Red Seal workers.
However, the Liberal government cut international student study permits by more than 40% and restricted postgraduate work permits without consulting higher-learning institutions that rely on those students. The consequences have been hard-hitting on Vancouver Island. Nearly 30 programs have been cut between North Island College and Vancouver Island University, including a dental assistant program that has trained workers for 50 years.
The Prime Minister says that Canada must deliver major nation-building projects. How will the government build the workforce Canada needs while its policies shut down the very important programs that are needed to train those workers, especially in rural Canada, in places like Port Alberni?
Maybe my colleague can speak about how that impact is hurting her riding and people who want to study and participate in the workforce in her community.
Mr. Speaker, in addition to what the hon. member mentioned in his comments, the Liberals also cut out private training colleges from Canada student grant applications. In Newfoundland and Labrador, there is a full ecosystem of universities and colleges that meet the demands of the private sector for the workforce. I completely understand this frustration and concern. There is always a top-down approach that does not translate well, especially in rural Canada, and these are the ultimate implications for communities as a result.
Mr. Speaker, I was in the House for the first part of my hon. colleague's excellent speech and was delighted to be here today for the rest of it. Our ridings have a lot in common, even though they are on opposite sides of the country. They are resource-based. They are filled with families, and they are struggling right now, yet the members across the way continue to stand up and tell us that Canadians have never had it so good and that the economy is all sunshine and rainbows.
I am wondering if the member can talk a bit about what it feels like on the ground under current circumstances in her communities.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague and friend's excellent explanation of exactly the same thing that I hear time and again whenever I am in my riding. I go to the grocery store and I see how people are struggling. I have constituents consistently reaching out and talking to me about impossible decisions that they have to make between eating and heating their homes, and seniors who cannot afford their medication. In light of the fact that we hear, day in and day out, this constant “good news” and “great announcements”, at the end of the day, on the ground in the communities, people are struggling. This is what we are trying to address, as responsible members of Parliament, especially as it relates to rural and coastal communities across this country.
Royal Assent
[Royal Assent]
[Translation]
I have the honour to inform the House that a communication has been received as follows:
Rideau Hall
May 6, 2026
Mr. Speaker,
I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable Mary May Simon, Governor General of Canada, signified royal assent by written declaration to the bills listed in the Schedule to this letter on the 6th day of May, 2026, at 3:21 p.m.
Yours sincerely,
Ken MacKillop
Secretary to the Governor General
The schedule indicates the bills assented to on Wednesday, May 6, were Bill C-13, An Act to implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and Bill C-18, An Act to implement the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between Canada and Indonesia.
[English]
It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Riding Mountain, Health; the hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, Taxation; the hon. member for Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, Health.
Government Orders
[Government Orders]
[English]
Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update tabled in Parliament on April 28, 2026, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak about the spring economic update, or as I call it, the spring deficit update. The Liberals, on their introduction of the bill, put out a good 250-page program called “Canada Strong for All.” I think it should be “Canada Deficits for All.” It reminds me of a famous Internet meme from Toy Story of Woody and Buzz Lightyear, where Buzz is pointing out saying, “as far as the eye can see.” That is what this economic update is. It is deficits as far as the eye can see.
Do members remember, not too long ago, in the Trudeau days, when Trudeau said that balanced budgets from the Liberal government was a commitment set in stone? He said it was “very” cast in stone. Now, 75% of the current Liberal bench, and about half the cabinet, is made up of people who were here under the Trudeau government, yet somehow this cast-in-stone commitment to balance the budget has disappeared.
Instead of a balanced budget, what do we get? We get deficits as far as the eye can see. It was $67 billion last year, which is well up from the worst of the Trudeau days; $65 billion this year; $63 billion next year; $58 billion in 2028; a $56-billion deficit in 2029; and $53 billion in 2030. That is $362 billion of added debt in just over six years.
Do members remember the government's saying it was going to spend less and invest more? Over the same period, this spending less is going to get us $406 billion in interest on the Liberal debt. There is money for bankers, with $406 billion for banker friends of the Prime Minister, not for Canadians, not for more doctors, not for more nurses, not for more schools or hospitals, not for lower taxes, heaven forbid, and not for defence or more infrastructure. That is $406 billion over a six-year period for the Liberal debt.
Do members remember, which was repeated ad nauseam by the government, by the ministers, that they were going to cut spending? Again, they said that they were going to spend less so they could invest more.
The President of the Treasury Board was at the operations committee yesterday, the mighty OGGO. I have to mention that. He stated that there was $60 billion less in spending, but what does the spring deficit update actually bring us? It brings more spending and program spending that actually outpaces the rate of inflation over the next six years. Somehow spend less equals more program spending. This is from the Liberals' own documents.
What about the public service? The government says it is going to cut 35,000 jobs, yet the Parliamentary Budget Officer has put out a report noting that spending on the public service is actually increasing 6%; from $71 billion, it is going up to $76 billion. In committee, we asked about this, and the Treasury Board told us that it is not actually reducing public servants or spending but just re-profiling, shifting things around.
What does all this extra spending get us? For 10 years, the government has been excusing its deficits by saying that spending is needed because it is going to add growth, is going to do this and is going to do that. What did we get? It is not a lot of growth, with a 1.7% average growth over the next six years. An added deficit of $362 billion equals 1.7% growth.
What is interesting is that the Bank of Canada put out its monetary policy report at about the same time that the spring deficit update came out from the government, and the Bank of Canada's number for growth is 16% lower in 2027 than what the government is saying, with a 10% lower prediction in GDP growth the following year.
How is it that the Bank of Canada has different numbers than the government does? We actually asked and were told that the Bank of Canada is using proper numbers. Who has the real numbers? How much higher is the deficit going to be if we are to believe the Bank of Canada over the government? It is about an extra $2 billion to $3 billion of deficit added per year.
That is certainly not adding to any productivity or growth. According to the Bank of Canada report on the contributions to real GDP growth over the coming years, in 2026, the year we are in now, the vast majority of growth in our GDP is government spending. Almost as much growth is from consumption. It is not from added exports, and it is not from growth in productivity. I think GDP growth is 1.2% this year, and almost all of it is government spending.
In 2027, 44% of the GDP growth that we are going to see in this country, according to the Bank of Canada, will not be from pipelines, from building more cars, from more industry or from more exports. It will be from government spending. In 2028, 27% of the projected growth, according to the Bank of Canada, is going to be government spending.
What should we do to increase growth? It is simple: Unleash our oil and gas industry. We can start by repealing Bill C-48, which bans tankers off British Columbia's north coast and stops Alberta oil from being exported. We could get rid of Bill C-69, the “no new pipelines” bill. We could end the destructive oil production cap that the government still has not repealed. We could actually get to building pipelines and increasing revenue and wealth for this country.
We saw a note from a very famous economist, Ms. Exner-Pirot. She stated that just in the two months of the war in Iran and the issues with the Strait of Hormuz, if we had built the northern gateway pipeline, we would be looking at an extra $3 billion in revenue for this country, just from the added oil from the last two months. The government is running a massive deficit. Instead, we could actually be making more.
I am going to talk about northern gateway and the lost revenue caused by the government when it cancelled the project. The government has still not set up the regulatory regime to allow a pipeline to the coast. Total government revenue between 2019 and 2048, if we had built northern gateway, would be $131.5 billion: $72 billion for the federal government and about $59 billion for the provincial governments. On an annual basis, in revenue by region, provinces will have lost out on $2.1 billion per year because the Liberal government cancelled the northern gateway project, with $1.7 billion lost for the federal government.
With respect to jobs, we just heard the member for Winnipeg North go on and on about, in the spring deficit update, money for trades. We do not have a lot of trades jobs available in Canada right now. It is wonderful that there is finally, after 10 years, recognition by the Liberal government that the people who build things have value, but where are the jobs going to be for them? The jobs could have been in helping build northern gateway. For that period, 773,000 jobs, on an FTE basis, are lost because the government threw up barriers and cancelled northern gateway.
The government will say that we need to have a carbon tax in order to sell our oil. We saw the president of Cenovus today state quite bluntly that we would be the only country in the world handicapping our oil and gas industry in such a way. He states that under Liberal policies, the government is producing high-paying jobs in Saudi Arabia, Russia and America instead of here in Canada. Canada's oil production is the most ethical, and we have an industry that is providing more jobs for indigenous people and more wealth than any other industry in Canada, but the government is trying to wreck it.
The government needs to get out of the way and recognize that the oil and gas industry has produced wealth for this country and for the world. It needs to get out of the way to allow us to build, and it needs to stop its inflationary practices and stop destroying this country with its deficit spending.
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have adopted this policy of “just get out of the way”, and it is unfortunate. The government has been able to achieve a great deal over the last year.
Canadians elected a new Prime Minister. This new Prime Minister made a commitment to build Canada strong by looking at things such as major projects, which means working with premiers and others. In fact, in Alberta, the member's home province, there is a memorandum of understanding that is going to see more natural resources getting to the west coast. There are all sorts of opportunities in which the government is a major player. The Calgary office has been set up.
I wonder if the member could give his thoughts on whether there is anyone within the Conservative Party who supports the major projects—
Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North overlooks the fact that this government has not repealed Bill C-48, which ensures no pipeline will get built to the B.C. coast. He overlooks that this government has still not repealed Bill C-69, the no new pipelines bill. This government has still not repealed the oil and gas production cap. Who is going to invest in this country when we cannot get our oil to market, and when the government is punishing the oil and gas industries with a carbon tax that does not apply to similar industries in other countries?
The Major Projects Office is like everything else the Liberals offer: It is an illusion.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I have a somewhat technical question.
The bill impacts several laws, including the Bank Act. If I understand correctly, the government is making it easier for foreign entities to take control of Canadian banks. The government was elected on a promise to protect the public from President Trump, yet it now appears to be facilitating the takeover of Canadian banks by various entities, particularly American ones.
Could this be because Brookfield is now registered in the United States so that it can continue to use tax havens, or is this really just kowtowing to the American president?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, my colleague has brought up a great point. He has actually brought up two great points.
When the same old, corrupt, tired Liberal government was elected, the Liberals stated they would no longer do omnibus bills, and that is what this is. I think there are 11 different pieces of legislation, including the act the member mentioned.
On the direct question about helping foreign entities come in and take over our banking system, I honestly wonder what he expects from the Prime Minister when one of his last acts in the private sector was moving his company out of Canada into the States, and then denying he actually did it.
The Prime Minister is not dedicated to our country. I think he is dedicated to his business interests.
Mr. Speaker, one thing the member missed in his speech that I think needs to be brought here very clearly, and I know the member will be able to address this, is the extra $3 billion put forward by this government, in a horrendously overstretched deficit, for international climate initiatives around the world.
Does the member really think that Canadians can afford an extra $3 billion, and what does this signal as far as the government's commitment to actually get things done properly with Canadian taxpayers' money?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Calgary Centre for his continued advocacy for Alberta's oil and gas industry.
It is ridiculous. This government continues its virtue-signalling tour around the world, spending Canadian money on wasteful projects, I believe, overseas, when we have 2.2 million people every month at food banks in Canada. We have seniors and we have parents who cannot feed their children.
This government should be focused on growing our wealth, not spending our wealth abroad so the Liberals can have photo ops.
Mr. Speaker, we frequently hear said in this place that the previous government under Stephen Harper was ready to move ahead with northern gateway and that it was the Liberals who struck it down. However, I am certain many people forgot, but I did not forget, that the Conservative platform in 2011 was specifically against exporting bitumen to Asia. Specifically, Stephen Harper's platform said that we should not ship Canadian fossil fuels to refineries in countries that have weaker environmental standards than we did. The Conservatives were explicitly against pipelines across British Columbia to export to Asia. As for northern gateway, it was struck down by the Federal Court of Appeal, and due to actions by the previous government, not the Liberals.
Mr. Speaker, of course, I disagree with the member from the Green Party. We probably disagree on everything. I think she needs to leave the past behind and, like Marty McFly, go back to the future and understand that Canada is in a different spot right now.
We need to get the pipelines built. We need to build in Canada, to serve Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by saying I will be sharing my time with the member for University—Rosedale.
We are living through a period of real global uncertainty. Trade tensions are rising. Conflicts around the world are disrupting supply chains and prices are being pushed up by forces that no single country controls. That is the reality Canadians are living with, but Canadians are not asking for analysis. They are asking for relief. They are asking for it in a way they can feel in their daily lives.
In Winnipeg West, people are not focused on global markets. I recently spoke with seniors in Winnipeg West who told me that grocery trips have become like a budget exercise, because they have to make sure that the basics last until the end of the month.
This is what people are dealing with. They are focused on whether their paycheque will last the month. They are focused on what gets bought, what gets delayed and what simply cannot wait. I hear it in grocery stores. I hear it from families and from young people trying to get started. The message is consistent. Things are getting harder, not easier. That is where responsibility matters.
We cannot control global instability. We are responsible for how it is felt here at home. We are responsible for whether support arrives when it is needed. We are responsible for whether opportunity is within reach or out of reach. We are responsible for whether life becomes more manageable or less so. If it does not show up in people's lives, it does not count.
Nowhere is that clearer than in affordability. Families in Winnipeg West are making difficult choices every time they go to the grocery store. They are stretching budgets that are already stretched thin. The Canada groceries and essentials benefit will support approximately 475,000 Manitobans, including over 36,000 people in Winnipeg West. For a family of four, up to $1,890 this year is not symbolic; it is groceries on the table, it is bills paid and it is breathing room where there was none. With a top-up arriving as early as June 5, that support arrives when pressure is being felt, not after it has passed. Affordability support only works if it is timely.
We are also making it easier for Canadians with disabilities to access the support they are entitled to. By streamlining the disability tax credit application process, expanding who can certify eligibility and reducing barriers for those with long-lasting medical conditions, more Canadians will be able to access the disability tax credit and the supports connected to it, including the Canada disability benefit. Affordability is not one-size-fits-all and support has to reach the people who need it most.
Gasoline is another point of concern. In Winnipeg West, people depend on their vehicles for work, school and daily life. When gasoline prices rise, there is no buffer. The impact is immediate. That is why reducing prices by about 10¢ per litre until Labour Day matters. It is not the full answer, by any means, but it is real relief every time someone fills their tank.
Right now, stability matters. Housing pressure is building, rents are rising, vacancy is tightening and ownership is becoming harder to reach.
This update responds with scale: more than $7 billion to accelerate rental housing and another $1.7 billion to remove barriers slowing construction. This means stalled projects move forward, more housing gets built in Winnipeg and more people get options instead of uncertainty. Without new supply, affordability does not stabilize; it erodes. However, housing does not get built on policy. It gets built by people.
We are also building for the long term.
In Manitoba, the talent is there. The barrier is access. That is why a $400 weekly apprenticeship benefit matters, along with supports for employers to take on apprentices. It removes the financial gap that keeps people out of the trades. That means more apprentices on job sites across Winnipeg, more projects completed and more stable, well-paying careers that stay in our communities. That is because opportunity only matters if people can actually take it.
The Canada Strong fund is about keeping investment in Canada: building here, hiring here and growing here. Growth only matters if Canadians feel it. In Winnipeg, we can already see how that works. At 17 Wing, and across our aerospace sector, defence is not abstract. It is work, skills and opportunity. Canada has now reached the 2% NATO target, strengthening both our alliances and our economy. Through the defence industrial strategy, more than 125,000 jobs will be supported across the country, and Winnipeg is part of that. That means aerospace work today, and opportunity for the next generation.
Strong communities also require safety. In Winnipeg West, people are concerned about fraud, scams and financial crime targeting vulnerable residents. This update includes $75 million for the Canada community security program, along with stronger action against fraud. That means better protection, and it means consequences for those who target people's savings and security. When people do not feel safe, nothing else works the way it should.
Strong communities are built through connection, through recreation, through sport and through shared spaces. With $755 million in sport funding, more young people in Winnipeg West will have access to programs that build confidence, discipline and belonging. For many families, that is not secondary; it is foundational. Communities are not built on announcements. They are built one person, one family and one neighbourhood at a time.
All of this is being done while maintaining fiscal discipline. We are reducing spending by $60 billion over five years and lowering the deficit. Canadians expect support in difficult times, but they also expect responsibility. We are expected to deliver both.
The people in Winnipeg West understand that the world is uncertain. They are not asking us to control it. They are asking us to respond to it, to make life more affordable, to make opportunity more accessible, to make communities safer and stronger, and to ensure that what is decided in this place is felt in their daily lives. In Winnipeg West, if it is not felt, it does not count.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Winnipeg West; we share the “west” part of our ridings.
I appreciate the member's speech and I honestly believe that he means well, he cares for people and he is not out here pushing the government's slogans. One of the issues he brought up was the grocery rebate. The way it is formulated, if we have a husband and wife, a mother and father, or two adults with up to four kids earning pennies above minimum wage in Manitoba, they would be earning too much and would not receive the grocery rebate. The way the government has it set up pushes most of the rebate into the hands of single earners, single families without children.
Can my colleague comment on that being the government's priority, not helping low-income families, which is the way the program is set up?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his kind words. This benefit is meant to give maximum relief to the lowest-income Canadians, and that is what it does. It is not a one-size-fits-all answer, but it is targeted toward the lowest-income Canadians.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the government likes to brag a lot about the economic update, saying from the get-go that it addresses the cost-of-living issue and that it will solve the current problem of inflation. However, there is not much in this economic statement that actually helps people, particularly those most affected by inflation, such as people on fixed incomes, like seniors. Nothing was announced for them. That was something that the Bloc Québécois had asked for. There is an unfairness among seniors. This government created two classes of seniors and it is still unable to solve this problem, even though it has economic consequences.
Why did my colleague and his government not use this economic update to ensure that all seniors receive the same pension amoun, starting at age 65?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that, as we have said, we are bringing relief to the lowest-income Canadians. This includes seniors.
Mr. Speaker, on that particular note, I have two quick points. I wonder if I could get the member to provide his thoughts on the national food program that was instituted and made permanent by our government. It is going to be there well into the future. I wonder if he could provide his thoughts on that.
Within the budget we talk a lot about building capital infrastructure. There is a hospital designation. I know that the member has a passion for our health care system. For me, personally, I would love to see an emergency room re-established at the Seven Oaks General Hospital. I have to give that plug. I am hoping that the province will see the value of that.
I am wondering if the member would like to highlight anything, whether it is the Grace Hospital or, in particular, the national school food program.
Mr. Speaker, I spent eight years working in Seven Oaks hospital. That particular place is near and dear to my heart. I thought that the provincial government's closing its emergency room was a terrible mistake.
However, this spring update is in addition to the many initiatives over the last 10 years that have helped lower-income Canadians, such as the Canada child benefit and the school nutrition program, which is feeding 400,000 children across the country. We are simply adding to the supports for lower-income Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I have known my colleague for a long time. I have a lot of respect for him.
The spring economic update states that the government is “assessing opportunities to unlock the...value of airports in support of investments in Canada's long-term growth, including through alternative models of ownership.” The Liberal government is looking at privatizing airports. This is not something that even Conservatives would do.
Rod Sims, the former chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, highlighted that “the travelling public loses big time, over time” when they tried this experiment.
Will my colleague stand in the House and tell the Canadian public that they will not privatize Canada's airports?
Mr. Speaker, the statement read by the hon. member, for whom I have tremendous respect, is simply an exploration of options and nothing more.
Mr. Speaker, across the country today, the most important conversations about health are not happening in doctors' offices. They are happening at kitchen tables, in workplaces and between neighbours on the sidewalk. They are conversations about making rent, about the cost of groceries, about finding work and about whether everything is going to be okay this week, this month or in this lifetime. These are, fundamentally, conversations about health. We often think about those conversations as conversations about the economy, as if those two things were not, in fact, one and the same.
I have spent 20 years as a family doctor in my riding. I have had very important conversations with my patients in my examination room, yet I am certain that the most important conversation about my patients' health, my constituents' health and the health of every single Canadian is not any conversation I have had before. It is the one that we are having today and that we will be having tomorrow. It is one that will be ongoing in the House. It is the one that I came here to be a part of.
I rise today as the new member of Parliament for University—Rosedale on the day that the House debates the spring economic update. I rise with my eyes wide open to the work that we have before us and the responsibility that we have all been given. I also take my seat with a clear sense of who has sat in the House before me.
[Translation]
Physicians have been elected to our Parliament since well before Confederation. The very first physician elected to Parliament kept his medical bag under his seat in the House.
[English]
I left my medical bag in Toronto, but my impulse to support the health of Canadians is the same as if I had brought it with me. I have joined this team because the health of the country is a bigger challenge than any one doctor can try to fix. The bigger medicine is right here, and I am filled with gratitude for the opportunity to participate in that work.
I thank the voters of University—Rosedale. They have entrusted me to be their voice, and I fully intend to continue to earn that trust every single day.
I thank my partner and my daughter for their inspiration, encouragement and patience. There are also my parents. My mom is a francophone immigrant from Egypt who landed in Montreal, and my dad is an anglophone boy born into a Hamilton family that stretches back many generations. I thank them teaching me that there is no one way to be Canadian. Actually, I thank them for teaching me that the fact that there is no one way to be Canadian is precisely the thing that makes our country great.
University—Rosedale is located in the heart of downtown Toronto. While I would never claim that it is the centre of the universe, in a very real sense, it reflects much of this country in 14 square kilometres. Yes, it is an urban riding in our biggest city, but 40% of my neighbours were born in another country. Many more come from another province. We have the largest university campus in Canada. We have one of the densest concentrations of hospitals on the continent.
Our community is filled with the energy of Kensington Market, the Annex, Koreatown, Chinatown, Trinity-Bellwoods, Yorkville, Little Italy, Rosedale and so many more distinct neighbourhoods. We have a vibrant urban indigenous community doing incredible work at places like the Native Canadian Centre at 16 Spadina Road. That street name, I would like to mention, is an anglicization of the Anishinabe word ishspadina.
University—Rosedale is a riding that contains Canada's past, its present and its future.
The document before the House is the spring economic update. Economic health is health, period. Of course, part of a country's health is determined by what happens inside hospitals and doctors' offices, but more is determined elsewhere, by whether we can access an education, whether our child has eaten breakfast, whether the air we breathe is clean, whether the streets we walk are safe, whether there is a job in our future and whether there is a future in our job. Therefore, housing policy is health policy. The Canada child benefit is health policy. Access to food is health policy. Apprenticeship training, community safety, innovation and investments in infrastructure are all health policies.
[Translation]
This is what I have learned in my 20 years treating Canadians: The best medicine, the one that does the most good for most people, is not medicine at all. It is a stable address; a meal at school every day; a good job with a good salary; and the social programs that this country has built and must have the courage to protect.
[English]
That is what 24,000 of my constituents using the Canadian dental care plan are asking for. That is what 50,000 of them benefiting from our GST credit are asking for. That is what every person under 35 in my riding who rents instead of owns, because for them the dream of home ownership is exactly that, just a dream, is asking for.
[Translation]
The Prime Minister said that this government's goal is to build Canada strong. A stronger Canada is a healthier Canada. That is what I see in the spring economic update: the expansion of the national school food program, the Canada groceries and essentials benefit, GST relief for first-time homebuyers and investments in community safety. Each of these measures is a brick. Together, we will build a strong wall that will protect the promise of a strong and healthy Canada.
[English]
Speaking of building with bricks, I want to spend a moment on affordable housing, because it is among the most powerful upstream health interventions any government can make. Since their peak, home prices in this country are down 20%. Rents are down 9%.
Those numbers are not abstractions in University—Rosedale. They represent a multi-generational family that gets to keep its duplex in Little Portugal, a graduate student who can afford their first apartment in the Annex or a new Canadian who does not have to leave the downtown core to raise their children. Still, there is much more work to be done. We are just getting started.
The late Senator Hugh Segal, one of the most thoughtful Canadians of his generation, used to speak of what he called the two essential freedoms: “freedom from fear and freedom from want.” He believed that any country worth its name owed both of them to its people. He was right.
That is what the word “progressive” means to me. It is a commitment to equitable and decent public services and a growing and fair economy. It is values and value in the same breath, at the same time, every single time.
This spring economic update is both a “freedom from fear” and a “freedom from want” document. It speaks to diversifying our trade partners and building the supply chains we will need when the next external shock arrives, and there will be one. As the Prime Minister has said, “we [must] take the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.” That is not only economic insurance; it is ensuring the strength and health of a country that intends to be around for a very long time.
The purpose of growing and protecting our economy is not so that it looks good on paper. The purpose of our economy is people, supporting them and creating the conditions for them to achieve their fullest potential. It is taking the world as it is, yes, and also working to move it closer to the world we want it to be. To me, that is what we mean when we speak of a Canada strong for all.
To my new colleagues on every side of the House, I will bring to this work the skills of every good family physician, which I have learned in two decades of medicine and leadership. They are listening and building relationships while holding the unshakable conviction that the purpose of any institution, whether it is a hospital or Parliament, is to show up for real people in the hardest moments of their lives. Members can count me in for that for the spring economic update and all the work ahead.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal member has a lengthy history of supporting Bernie Sanders. A quick Google search revealed that he has many photos of press releases from events where she is seen sitting next to Bernie Sanders or supporting and applauding him down in the United States.
What U.S.-style politics and policy from Bernie Sanders is she going to import into Canada?
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with the member opposite and every member of the House.
As we know, this is a party that attracts people from all across the political spectrum and, in fact, from all sides of the aisle. There are lots of good ideas that we can take from all kinds of countries as we consider our options going forward.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to welcome the newly elected member and congratulate her on her excellent speech. I believe this is her first speech. Large parts of it were delivered in impeccable French. It is heartwarming to hear that.
I was very moved by my colleague's concern for health care. That is the top priority for people in Quebec. People often speak to me about it. Unfortunately, our health care system is under strain. This is often due to a lack of funding.
One demand the Bloc Québécois has been making of the government for years is to increase funding for the health care system. Health transfers are increasing by about 3% a year, but the costs of the system are rising by 6% a year. We are therefore in the same situation as we were during the Harper years.
Will my hon. colleague put pressure on the government to increase health care funding?
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important issue. As I see it, the economic statement we are discussing today is all about health care from start to finish. The investments our government is making in the determinants of health are truly significant. Negotiations between the federal government and the provinces and territories regarding health care will always require a lot of work.
Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on a question asked by my colleague across the aisle regarding relations with the United States.
I would like my colleague to talk about what our country can do to set a good example in terms of health care systems. What kind of example can we set for the United States?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, despite all of our challenges, our health care system in Canada is a great moral victory. The notion that no Canadian should ever be bankrupted by medical costs is a fundamental premise that is held up by all sides of the political spectrum. I believe that is a lesson Canada can continue to teach the world, and one we must continue to heed ourselves in all of the great work ahead.
Mr. Speaker, first I want to congratulate my colleague on her election. She has been a strong proponent of a universal public pharmacare plan. She has long advocated and argued that a national single-payer pharmacare program would actually save money, but now she represents a riding in a province that does not have a pharmacare deal.
Can New Democrats, the people of Ontario and the people of her riding count on her to be a champion, to force her government to get to the table with Ontario and deliver on the promise of a national pharmacare plan so those people in Ontario can actually get access to it?
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleague across the way as well. Absolutely, I think it will be critically important for the Government of Ontario to sit down with the Government of Canada to talk about the future of pharmacare. There is no universe in which that conversation can happen without both parties at the table.
Mr. Speaker, I must start with congratulating the new member for University—Rosedale. I have long admired her advocacy for our public health care system when going down to Washington.
This may be a bit of a tough question. Does she agree with the Canadian Medical Association that the climate crisis is the single biggest public health threat of the 21st century? Can she help us get it back on track, with her government at the moment going slow?
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, it is the World Health Organization itself that has deemed climate change to be the number one threat to health all over the world. It is not just a problem in Canada, as the member knows well. Certainly, it is absolutely a priority of this government and must continue to be a priority for all of us to make sure we are taking care of those essential determinants of health, including the climate.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Riding Mountain.
On April 28, the Minister of Finance proudly tabled his economic update. He talked about “Canada Strong”. He repeats that line every week in the House. The 167‑page update includes billions of dollars in spending, $25 billion for a sovereign debt fund, strategies, programs and announcements on top of announcements. In Parliament, the government was talking about ambition.
Meanwhile, on April 28, people in Baie‑Saint‑Paul, Saint‑Hilarion, Beaupré, Boischatel, L'Isle‑aux‑Coudres, Île d'Orléans and in Montmorency—Charlevoix were going about their daily lives. Families were worried about their grocery bills. Young couples were holding off on buying their first home. Seniors were counting down the days until their next pension cheque. Workers were wondering how they were going to be able to pay their mortgage at the end of the month.
These are the two realities that we are facing here in Canada in 2026. In Ottawa, the government talks to us about billions of dollars; in Quebec, however, people talk to us about dollars. I am rising today to make a connection between these two realities. To hear the Liberals talk in the House, it seems like all is well, yet Canadians know the truth, because they live with it daily. They go to the grocery store and see that things are more expensive. They go to the gas station and gas seems a lot more expensive too. When the time comes to pay their rent, mortgage or credit card, they see that something is wrong.
I would like to talk about credit card budgets. The government talks about discipline, caution and responsibility, but let us look at the facts through the eyes of an an impartial third party. Claude Lavoie is not a Conservative. He was director-general of economic studies at Finance Canada. He said this:
It's not that the GDP is doing better. It's more that we took in more revenue [including from gas taxes, because gas is expensive, so it brings in more money] and spent a little less by deferring certain expenses.
In other words, the programs that were announced were not delivered, the money was not spent and people were taxed more. Now, the government is telling us that public finances have been carefully managed and that it has kept its promises. No, the government did not keep its promises at all. Not only did it not spend the money, but it imposed more taxes. It is also important to note that the Liberals are projecting an average deficit of $55 billion over five years. Things are not going well when it comes to taxation.
The Conservatives are calling this a credit card budget. Basically, the government is paying the bills with the national credit card. Then, Canadians are forced to pay their bills with their own personal credit cards. That is why everything costs more. It is because when the Liberals spend without any limit, prices, interest rates and mortgages all go up and families get poorer.
Today, the interest on the debt costs more than all of the health transfers to all the provinces. We were talking about health transfers. The interest on the debt costs more than all of that. Imagine. Every dollar people spend on federal taxes when they make a purchase goes toward paying bankers and bondholders. It does not go toward paying doctors and nurses, let alone supporting patients. Meanwhile, Canadians are skipping meals.
There are parents who work full time. Some even work overtime, like Kevin, who called me this week to talk about his situation. He even shared his story with QUB Radio through tears. That is the reality for hard-working citizens who can no longer make ends meet. It is not that these people are not putting in the resources, the work or the effort. It is that they simply can no longer survive under Liberal rule, which takes everything from them. There are seniors living on $2,000 a month. How is anyone supposed to get by on $2,000 a month? The Prime Minister told us that affordability is the best it has ever been, but people do not live in press releases. They live in the real world.
I would like to discuss something else that was announced: the sovereign debt fund. Despite inflation and the cost of living crisis, the government found a way to borrow $25 billion to create a gimmicky sovereign debt fund. The government talks about Norway and says that it will follow the Norwegians' approach. It cannot be serious. Norway built its sovereign wealth fund by developing its resources and became wealthy by selling these resources. Norway's sovereign wealth fund is worth $3.5 trillion Canadian. It achieved this by developing its resources, not by going into debt and borrowing money.
What is the Canadian government doing? Instead of using surpluses, it is taking on more debt to create the illusion of a sovereign wealth fund when that is not what it actually is. Basically, it is as if our neighbour boasted about opening up a savings account and depositing money into it but failed to mention that he used his credit card for the deposit. Ultimately, it is not a terrible idea, although what is most concerning is that the government refuses to even say how much this fund is going to cost per year.
It is the flagship measure in its economic announcement, its economic update, but it refuses to say what the real annual cost will be. When a government refuses to say how much its key measure will cost, that is not transparency; it is a warning about what is to come. It shows what Canadians are going to experience in the coming years. While the government is asking people to tighten their belts and telling young people to make sacrifices, we are seeing money fly off in every direction. The government is investing at least $90 billion in Alto, a high-speed train project that the Minister of Finance recused himself from, or at least, he was supposed to. After 18 hours of Liberal monologues, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics was finally able to call the minister to answer questions.
The government is investing close to $1 billion in the program to confiscate legal, registered guns. The government is going to spend nearly $1 billion to take those guns away, when they are clearly not the problem.
The government spends $20 billion a year on outside consultants. It has hired 100,000 public servants over the past 10 years, and yet it still has to spend more than $20 billion a year on consultants. It has spent $65 billion on bureaucracy, which just keeps expanding. It spent $42 million in just one year on the Major Projects Office, which has not recommended a single project since it was created. Meanwhile, Canadian families are still having to choose between paying for groceries, paying the rent and putting gas in their cars.
That is why the priority really lies elsewhere for the Conservatives. Our priority is to put money back in the pockets of Canadians, not in the pockets of consultants, not in the pockets of well-connected insiders and not in the coffers of poorly managed megaprojects. We want to put money back in the pockets of Canadians.
I mentioned mismanaged projects. One that comes to mind straightaway is Cúram. Cúram is the latest chapter in an ongoing saga. In fact, we have not talked about it enough, and it needs to be discussed. It was in the budget. It is a computer system that was supposed to modernize pension payments, but what actually happened was that tens of thousands of seniors did not receive their cheques. These are people who worked all their lives, paid their taxes and trusted the government. What did the government do? In its economic update, with the trust of Canadians, it threw another $473 million at this fiasco. The total cost of creating this software was estimated at $1.75 billion, yet it has apparently surpassed $7 billion. That is what we are learning, because we are finding out more every day. The cost increased by 277%, for a cost overrun of $5.25 billion. That is what the Liberals' idea of sound and effective management of public finances.
It gets even worse. It might seem like this must be the end, but it is not, because there was also an internal memo forbidding public servants from telling seniors who were not receiving their cheques that the problem was caused by the new software. Two days after the economic update was released and the additional $473 million thrown at this fiasco was discovered, the government used its majority to block the opposition's requests for parliamentary documents.
Every day when a sitting of the House of Commons opens, the Speaker stands up and says, “Let the doors be opened”. Basically, the Speaker is telling the citizens to enter the people's House. However, when opposition parties ask questions, those doors close. That is not transparency. That is certainly not accountability.
I would, however, like to mention one good thing about the economic update, and that is sport. When something good is being done, we should be able to acknowledge it. The investments in amateur sport and sports federations are excellent news. It is too bad that we cannot vote on just one measure, because everyone agrees with that one. That is not a Conservative or Liberal point of view, but a Canadian point of view. The investments in sport and physical activity are good investments. That said, this measure is aimed primarily at the young people, families and volunteers who spend their evenings at rinks and fields. I look forward to seeing how direct support will be delivered to our teams on the ground. People can trust me because I am able to point out what is being done right. I am not just being partisan when I make a judgment and say that bad things are happening.
Our role is not just to criticize or oppose; it is also to put forward proposals. Conservatives believe that a government should live by the same rules as Canadian families. When money is tight, choices have to be made. The government should cut waste, reduce unnecessary spending and respect workers' money, because every dollar spent comes out of taxpayers' pockets, and that needs to be respected.
I will conclude on that note. The government needs to cut spending on consultants, trim the bureaucracy, put an end to mismanaged projects, cut waste and stop interfering in areas of provincial jurisdiction. The government also needs to excel in the few areas where the Canadian federation requires its involvement, namely borders, the armed forces, the justice system, a strong dollar and strong interprovincial trade.
This is what we should be focusing on to ensure that our constituents live in a prosperous country and feel that that is their reality.
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his very interesting speech.
I will come back to what he said at the beginning about the deficit, which is lower than expected because growth was higher than expected, given that government spending was deferred. There is also another factor. The disaster mitigation and adaptation fund was used less than anticipated. If there had been more floods or fires, we would have had the expected deficit.
I want to raise another point that my colleague mentioned later in his speech: the Canada Strong fund. That is $25 billion over three years. It does not appear on the balance sheet. In accounting terms, it is off-budget because it is asset-backed. However, as the member said, it still adds $25 billion to the government's debt, even if it does not appear in the deficit.
Is that a good idea?
Mr. Speaker, this is very odd. In 2024, England set up a fund exactly like that. It was a fund directly financed with debt. The British Parliament refused to call it a sovereign wealth fund because that is not what it was. The term does exist, and it applies in some countries, such as Norway. However, the concept we are discussing is not a real sovereign wealth fund.
Oddly enough, our current Prime Minister was a consultant. He was there to help the British Parliament put that in place. He knows that this is not a sovereign wealth fund. He is using the term, but not the concept.
In my opinion, that is a mistake.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the member is just wrong. It is a sovereign wealth fund. Many countries around the world have sovereign wealth funds. Conservatives can say whatever they want, but at the end of the day, it is a sovereign wealth fund.
The other thing that is very clear is that we have the unholy alliance of the Conservatives and the Bloc making the decision that Canada should not have a sovereign wealth fund. They cannot make the connection between the major projects, the sovereign wealth fund and how billions of dollars are going to be used for such things as, in some cases, those major projects moving forward and, in other cases, different ways that funds can be brought in to create thousands of jobs and all sorts of economic opportunities.
Why are the Conservatives stopping progress—
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, it is always rather funny to hear our Liberal colleagues speaking to us as though their words are actually backed up by results. They talk about a wealth fund, meaning a fund containing wealth, but it is actually financed through debt.
I said that the British Parliament refused to call it that. It was not the Conservatives in Canada who did so, but the British Parliament. The Prime Minister was an adviser on the project. He was told it would not be called that.
The other thing my colleague just said is that Canadians are not being given the chance to make a decision. Indeed, that is what the Liberals have been doing for the past 11 years. They spend without restraint. They impose their decisions on Canadians by telling them that it is the right thing to do and that they have nothing to worry about, but we go further into debt year after year. Things are not getting any better. The country's finances are not getting any better. Over the next five years, we will lose an average of $55 billion a year. They want us to believe that money will suddenly start growing on trees and everything will be fine.
That is gambling with taxpayers' money, and it is a mistake.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, a recent study by the Montreal Economic Institute estimates that the government's buy Canada policy could drive up costs by more than $12 billion a year. During an affordability crisis, does my colleague think paying much higher prices for Liberal vanity projects like Alto rail is the best way to help Canadians keep more of their hard-earned dollars in their pockets?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question.
Once again, it is a grand idea. Canada is going to build a high-speed rail system at the taxpayers' expense. California is currently trying it out. It has already cost $300 billion, and it is not over yet. Here, they say it will cost $90 billion, but they do not say how much a ticket will cost. They are selling a project, but they are not saying how many people will be on it or how much it will cost to maintain.
We already have airlines operating between Toronto and Montreal and between Montreal and Quebec City. They pay taxes and create jobs. Now the government is going to take responsibility for this and use public funds to compete with the private sector. What is more, the government is not telling people how much it will cost to ride this infamous train. It may turn out to be more expensive and less efficient than flying. Families will not use that train, but they will be paying for it their whole lives, for generations to come.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the bill is about how much money the Liberals have actually wasted here. The PrescribeIT program is a blinding example, and it is absolutely a waste of $300 million.
Canada Health Infoway is a so-called non-profit organization funded by the federal Minister of Health. For nearly a decade, the Liberals poured money into a program called “PrescribeIT”. They promised PrescribeIT would eliminate fax machines for prescription drugs, but as a result, it was a $300-million failure.
There was $300 million spent, and fewer than 5% of prescriptions ever made were on the platform. In my province of Manitoba, a province of over one million people, the program collected just over $1,200 in fee revenue over 15 months. The Liberals promised that it would be financially self-sustainable. What a joke. However, after spending $300 million with nothing to show for it, the Liberals quietly shut down the program and hoped that Canadians would never notice.
The CEO of Canada Health Infoway, who refused to disclose his own salary at the health committee, was earning nearly $900,000 a year while this was happening. This was for a non-profit organization. He was fired last month, after the Conservatives launched an investigation.
This is what Liberal spending looks like. It is a black hole with no accountability.
Private Members' Business
[Private Members' Business]
[English]
Silver Alert National Framework Act
moved that Bill C-263, An Act to establish a national framework for silver alerts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
She said: Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to my bill, Bill C-263, an act to establish a national framework for silver alerts.
This bill is deeply personal to many in my community, especially the Moberg family of North Kildonan in Winnipeg. In December 2023, Earl Moberg, who suffered from advanced dementia, disappeared from his home. Again, this is in the middle of a Winnipeg winter. Despite extensive search efforts, he was never found and is presumed deceased.
Mr. Moberg was a real person. He was a husband. He was a father. He was a grandfather. He was a teacher. He was a veteran in the Canadian air force reserve. He was a man who was deeply proud of his Swedish heritage. He was a man who spent decades serving northern Manitoba communities. He was a man who loved long walks, gardening, hiking, swimming, learning and spending time with his wife and kids. Even into his later years, he remained very physically active and intellectually curious. His daughter, Britt Moberg, described him as the person she always went to for advice, until, of course, the dementia progressed and those roles were reversed and she started to have to care for him.
Like so many families that are dealing with dementia in someone they love, the Moberg family watched someone they deeply cared for slowly disappear. Then, they physically lost him as well. They were dealing with, really, two losses over a fairly short period of time, only a few years.
I think that is one of the hardest realities for families living with someone they love with dementia. They lose someone in stages. It is not just overnight. At first, it is small things. There might be repeated questions, maybe some confusion, maybe getting lost very briefly. Then, over time, safety concerns grow very serious. One day, they may be fine to be left alone or even drive their car like normal, and then the next day, it is not fine anymore. Eventually, a walk around the block can be very unsafe.
Earl's family, like all families that deal with dementia, tried their very best to adapt to a really impossible situation. They used trackers. They would redirect him when he wanted to do something that was no longer safe for him, like go for a walk by himself. His wife became a full-time caregiver for him. They sought medical assessment after medical assessment. They sought all the supports that were available to them.
However, for many families that are dealing with this, it can be incredibly overwhelming. It can be scary. It can be tremendously exhausting, emotionally, physically and mentally. While they are dealing with all these changes, their heart is breaking because they are losing someone they love, someone they used to go to for advice.
Then, in the Moberg household, one winter evening, unbeknownst to his family, Mr. Moberg walked out the front door and never came home.
I think what made this tragedy really difficult for me to stomach, personally, was that someone may have seen him but just did not know he was missing. One woman later reported that the day after he went missing, she saw a confused, older gentleman in a local lab clinic, one that he happened to frequent. He appeared a bit disoriented. He was able to say that his phone was dead, but she did not know that he was missing. She did not find out that there was a person missing until she saw, days later, a public alert online. It was only online in Manitoba. That man happened to match the description of Mr. Moberg. In fact, she went to help in the search to find him, but of course, by the time she put two and two together on this, it was far too late. She later shared with the family, as well, that she had this gut feeling that something was just off, that maybe this man needed help. We all often get these gut feelings, but we often also ignore them. We do not really have the confidence or enough information to act on that gut feeling.
That is the precise moment this bill is looking to deal with, to solve. I keep imagining that if she had received a silver alert on her phone that morning, with a description of a man who was missing, and then she also had a gut feeling when she saw a man of a similar description, maybe she would have acted. Maybe she would have called someone. Maybe she would have called emergency services. Something may have happened. Mr. Moberg, if that was him, might still be alive today if this had been in place.
That is really the core motivation for this bill, for those moments when we see someone and we also have that alert. That is when there is action. It is when those stars align that we need all the technologies, all the supports in place, to ensure that we are bringing people home safely.
Missing person cases involving seniors living with dementia are unique because of the specific vulnerability they have. They may appear normal, just a senior going for a walk. They may not even know they are in danger. They may not know they are missing. They may not be able to verbalize it. They may not remember where they live or whom to call in an emergency. They may not even know that they are dying of dehydration and hypothermia, just that they are in pain, but they cannot verbalize it.
These are uniquely time-sensitive scenarios. Public Safety Canada has stated that if a person living with Alzheimer's disease goes missing and is not found within 12 hours, they have a 50% chance of being found deceased or severely injured, notably with hypothermia and dehydration, or having drowned. Therefore, every minute matters and every hour matters. Every moment matters when we are searching for seniors with dementia who have gone missing.
However, in Canada today, whether the public is rapidly notified or not really depends on geography. Some provinces have explored silver alerts. Some have pilot programs. Some have legislation on paper, such as Manitoba, or online alerts, such as Manitoba. Some really have no operation at all.
Meanwhile, Canada already possesses the technological infrastructure capable of delivering rapid geo-targeted alerts directly to mobile devices, to televisions and to radios. We already use this infrastructure for Amber Alerts and other emergency notifications such as weather alerts and tornado warnings. I have gotten a few of those over the years. Therefore, this is not an issue of technological capability limitations. It is an issue of coordination, standards and consistent implementation across Canada.
That is why the bill was intentionally drafted as a framework bill. It would not create a federally controlled emergency alert regime, just to be very clear. We already have one of those with provinces. Instead it would recognize the constitutional reality that provinces and territories oversee policing and emergency management, while asking the federal government to provide a real national leadership role and coordination.
Specifically, the bill would require the federal government to work with provinces and territories, police, emergency management officials, care providers and other experts to develop a national framework for silver alerts. The framework would include things like harmonizing risk thresholds, improving interprovincial coordination, establishing privacy guidelines, supporting geo-targeted notifications and ensuring that alerts are issued responsibly.
I want to really emphasize that last point, because the bill is not proposing an alert for every missing person. Every missing person does matter, but it is the specific vulnerability of a senior with dementia who goes missing that is critical. The window to find them is so short. Families understand the sensitivities with issuing these alerts, and the importance of dignity and respect for the individuals.
Ms. Britt Moberg spoke very movingly about this tension to me, saying that for people living with dementia, it is difficult. Things such as “You cannot drive anymore, Dad” are difficult discussions that need respect and dignity, and that needs to be a core frame for establishing the silver alerts. We put a lot of thought into that when drafting the legislation.
In fact, Canada's existing alert infrastructure already allows alerts to be targeted with quite remarkable precision. They can be targeted to within a few city blocks, so that just the cellphones in a specific area would get an alert. That matters, because it would help reduce unnecessary disruption and reduce alert fatigue, while still mobilizing public support when someone is truly vulnerable and at imminent risk of peril. Those are really some of the key principles here: proportionate, targeted, responsible public notification for time-sensitive cases involving vulnerable people.
Importantly, this issue is becoming more urgent. By 2030, nearly one million Canadians are expected to be living with dementia. By 2050, that number is going to hit 1.7 million. People are more likely to get dementia as they age, so as our population ages, more Canadian families will, unfortunately, face what the Mobergs have faced. In the past few years, there have been some very tragic cases, including Mr. Moberg's.
In British Columbia, for example, there was a news headline the other day that said that search and rescue teams are warning that missing seniors with cognitive impairments are becoming a growing trend. In Saskatchewan, an 86-year-old man with Alzheimer's wandered out of a care home unnoticed and was later found deceased. Also in Saskatchewan, just a few weeks ago, an 82-year-old grandmother living with only mild dementia, which is difficult to deal with, vanished and was found deceased nearly two weeks later.
In Nova Scotia, a 79-year-old woman with dementia disappeared from a seniors residence. Luckily, the alert went out in some way and helped find her in time. Another Nova Scotia senior living with dementia disappeared and was unfortunately later found deceased. In Alberta, a missing 79-year-old woman with dementia was fortunately found again within the 12-hour window. Particularly tragic, in January, Quebec's coroner was investigating the death of a 90-year-old woman found outside her seniors residence after wandering out in the cold. It was reportedly the fourth similar death involving a Quebec senior in roughly one month.
These stories are happening across Canada, in every neighbourhood and in rural and remote areas. It does not matter where. There is no discrimination with this issue. It is everywhere. It is in care homes, in hospitals and in our own backyards. As our population ages, we have the responsibility to do something about this effectively and efficiently.
I want to make clear that this is not a partisan bill, not a political bill and not a left-wing or right-wing issue. This is a human issue. We have the technology to make a difference. It is in the palm of our hand every day, all day. We have it right there. We just need to mobilize it.
I want to acknowledge members from different parties, including the Liberal Party, who have reached out to me, including the Minister of Emergency Management. They have engaged in thoughtful and constructive dialogue with me on this. I am very encouraged by that.
I also want to recognize there may be amendments at committee talking about provincial jurisdictions, certain operational thresholds and various implementation details. I welcome that conversation very much, because ultimately the goal here is to save lives, and this is a tool that we can use. If this legislation helps push Canada forward toward a more coordinated, medically informed and operationally workable system that allows communities to respond faster when vulnerable seniors disappear, then this bill would have accomplished something very meaningful.
At its core, this legislation is asking a simple question: When a vulnerable senior with dementia disappears and we already possess the technology capable of notifying nearby Canadians immediately, should we use it more effectively? The Conservatives believe that the answer is resolutely, yes, we should.
I do want to dedicate this bill to the Moberg family for their courage, resilience and resolve in turning an unimaginable tragedy into meaningful action. It has been an honour to work with them and to get to know them, and we hope, together, today will be one more step toward saving lives of vulnerable seniors in Canada.
[Translation]
Today, the House of Commons will debate at second reading my private member's bill, Bill C‑263, an act to establish a national framework for silver alerts. This legislation is rooted in the tragic disappearance of Earl Moberg, a Winnipeg man with advanced dementia who left his home in December 2023 and never returned. His daughter, Britt Moberg, is with me here in Ottawa today.
Like so many Canadian families grappling with dementia, the Mobergs went through the extremely painful experience of watching a loved one slowly slip away even before their physical passing. The purpose of this bill is to save other families from having to experience the same tragedy.
Canada's population is aging rapidly. By 2030, nearly one million Canadians are expected to suffer from dementia. According to Public Safety Canada, about 60% of people with dementia will go missing at some point. If they are not found within 12 hours, there is a 50% chance that they will be found injured or dead from hypothermia, dehydration or drowning.
This problem affects every region of the country, including Quebec. Over the past few months, Quebec coroners have investigated a number of tragic deaths involving vulnerable seniors who wandered outside in winter. This story reminds us that people with dementia can appear to be fine, like any other senior taking a walk alone, when they are actually confused, lost and in imminent danger.
Quebec has already recognized the importance of silver alerts and has an alert system. However, the bill seeks to work in collaboration with the provinces, including Quebec, to improve national coordination, the criteria for issuing alerts, privacy protection and the responsible use of existing alert technologies. The bill also seeks to fully respect provincial jurisdictions and not to create and impose a federal system on the provinces. Rather, it calls on the federal government to collaborate with the provinces, police, emergency preparedness officials and medical experts on establishing a flexible, coordinated national framework.
Canada already has the technological infrastructure needed to quickly issue geotargeted alerts to cellphones over the same system used for amber alerts and weather alerts. The problem is not technological. The problem is a lack of coordinated, common standards across the country.
[English]
I would ask all parties from every corner of this country to seriously consider supporting this bill to go to committee for further study, and ultimately getting it over the finish line so that, as a country and as a House of Commons, we can ensure we are using the power in the palm of our hand to save lives of vulnerable seniors.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my hon. colleague from Winnipeg for bringing the bill forward. She has been a tremendous advocate, not only for this family, but for the broader community, for quite a long time now.
I am pleased to see that the bill has made its way to the floor of the House of Commons. I am certainly open to supporting the bill to the committee stage. I understand that there are some questions that might have to do with jurisdiction or with privacy.
Can my colleague can speak to some of the reasonable amendments she feels we might be able to make collaboratively at the committee stage in order to get the bill back to the House in tip-top shape, in order to make it the law of the land?
Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the question from the hon. member. We work very well together on the industry committee, and it has been a pleasure to get to know him over the years.
I am not proposing any amendments, as I think the bill is great as it is, but I am very open to amendments if other parties would like to propose them.
My one concern is that I do not want to see the bill watered down to where it is just symbolic. Our goal, mine and the Moberg family's, with the advocacy they have done, is to make a real difference.
I believe, given the alert structure that exists, there is a serious federal role to be played, in the sense that it can lead. The Minister of Emergency Management and Community Resilience can call a federal-provincial-territorial meeting, for example, on silver alerts. Let us get to the table. Let us discuss a framework. Let us have some coordination across the country. There can be a real leadership role.
I just want to point out as well that right at the beginning, subsection 3(2) specifies working with provinces and territories as paramount, so it is in there.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the member for Kildonan—St. Paul on introducing this bill. I commend her for raising awareness about the fact that seniors, especially those living with dementia, need the support of their community and all members of society to help them safely navigate this difficult stage of life.
I am curious to know why Manitoba does not have a silver alert system in place. Quebec has a system that works extremely well, and Ontario has one too. The two neighbouring provinces are already working together. I am not convinced that a national standard would improve the alert service we already have in Quebec. I am curious to know what is happening in Manitoba. Does the RCMP have a resource problem?
I would like my colleague to explain why this debate is not taking place in the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I believe Manitoba has a similar silver alert framework to Quebec. Unless there has been a new development that I am not aware of, Quebec's silver alert, like Manitoba's, will go on police websites and social media. It notifies through a paper or electronic route, but not on our phones like an Amber alert or a tornado warning. Unless there has been a change in Quebec, I believe that is the case. It does not currently alert to our phones that there is a missing senior.
There is a legislative framework that exists in Manitoba, but it has not been actioned to the level of cellular devices. It is just online. As I mentioned in my remarks, a silver alert technically went out for Mr. Moberg, but it was just the online alert. That is what Manitoba is calling its silver alert. What I am calling a silver alert in the bill is more about the cellular device capabilities that we see with Amber alerts, tornado warnings and things like that.
I think Manitoba and Quebec have similar things. The problem is that they are not alerting people who are not necessarily paying attention to those notification boards. That is the problem.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from Kildonan—St. Paul for her leadership on what truly could make a difference across this country and not just in her home community, where she has personally been acquainted with the realities of tragedies that can befall families and communities when seniors go missing and we do not have a way to alert the broader community.
I think it is really critical that this contains the distribution of a system across our country for all communities so that regardless of where people live, the framework would exist. Whether they are in rural Ontario, Manitoba or the territories, they would benefit from this kind of system.
Can the hon. member share with the House any jurisdictions where this has been implemented in an electronic format as proof of its success?
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. has quite an extensive alert system. It depends on the region, but it is quite efficient. It has public billboards, sort of, across its infamous interstate system. Someone can be driving down there, going on a road trip with their family, and they will see an alert for the missing person. It can use cellular devices as well for these various alerts. The U.S. is the best example of this, and there has been some success.
I want to mention that the purpose of the national coordination is so we can get research and testimony from experts across the country, which would make it easier for the will of the provinces to get moving and do this. It is to help make this happen, because the legislation is often there, but it has not happened. This bill aims to fix that.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to have the chance and the opportunity to speak to Bill C-263 today.
[English]
First, I want to thank my friend, the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, for proposing a bill that is not only meaningful to the Moberg family, and I want to salute the courage of the Moberg family who were in Ottawa today, but could make a real difference in the lives of seniors living with dementia.
I think all of us in the chamber know at least one person, have grown up with one person or, as adults, have run into one person who has dementia. Sometimes they are in our families. Sometimes they are close friends. To watch their decline over time is one of the scariest and one of the most difficult psychological things one could possibly have happen.
First of all, the individual, as they are aware of their decline, which is often the case, is terrified. Their family members are also terrified. As the hon. member said in her speech, one day the person could be watching television, conversing, having dinner with their family, and the next day they could be in a state where if they walk out the front door, they will not know how to find their way back home.
I cannot even tell members how many cases, over the course of the last 10 years that I have been a member of this place, I have heard from families with a loved one with dementia who has had a serious incident happen, and the fears that have been expressed. It goes beyond touching my heart.
The fact that the hon. member took this opportunity to hear a tragic story and use it to come forward with a piece of legislation that could improve the lives of Canadians is deeply appreciated.
As she said, this is not a partisan bill. This is not a bill that is left, right or centre. This is a human bill. The proposal of a national framework to support a coordinated silver alert system, to utilize our existing national public alerting system to issue geo-targeted notifications when a vulnerable senior disappears, would be a collaborative effort. It would be a collaborative effort between federal government, provincial government and territorial government. It would alert the public, through TV, radio and wireless devices, to a life-threatening situation. We do that right now for tornadoes, fires or Amber Alerts. The goal is to include this type of vulnerable senior in that system.
[Translation]
The system is very busy. In 2024 alone, 855 emergency alerts were sent out across Canada. They contained vital information during extreme storms and other critical events.
[English]
I would also note that this file is being actively worked on by the government. In budget 2025, we committed to renewing the NPAS model to better support emergency alerting throughout Canada.
Indeed, the federal government is in discussion with provincial and territorial counterparts to promote more consistent use of public alerting systems, including guidance for consistent alerting for missing vulnerable people. As such, it gives me pleasure today to say that we, as a government, intend to support the bill with targeted amendments at the committee stage. We want to ensure that some of the drafting concerns that we hope to address will be considered by the committee. Hopefully, we can find a means so that everybody in the House will be comfortable with the bill.
First, any framework must be developed in consultation with our provincial and territorial counterparts across the country, to ensure that it complements, rather than complicates, existing local protocols.
As the member mentioned, provincial and territorial governments are referenced in the bill. Perhaps there is another way that we would like to reference them. Measures proposed in the legislation do relate to an area that is in provincial jurisdiction, as the member recognized. We just want to make sure that everyone is onside.
Search and rescue operations are led, almost always, by local police services in coordination with provincial agencies and volunteer organizations like Search and Rescue Canada. We were honoured to welcome Search and Rescue Canada on the Hill this week as part of our humanitarian workforce program, for which we just announced $108 million in new funding.
When a senior goes missing in a rural township or dense urban core, the response must be immediate and tailored to that specific area or community.
[Translation]
In addition, many provinces have already taken steps to adopt silver alert systems for missing seniors. Quebec's non-intrusive alert system, which was announced in February 2026, aims to inform police services.
This evidence-based program also uses non-intrusive means like social media, television and radio programs to alert the public. As my colleague said, these alerts are not sent out on cellphones at the moment.
[English]
We want to make sure that we co-operate. One of the things the member mentioned is the privacy and dignity of the senior. We want to make sure that how we coordinate this under the proposal involves something that will respect the privacy and dignity of seniors and their families. I am sure that, as we understand, a silver alert would broadcast the name, photo and medical condition of an individual to possibly millions of people, depending on the area. We want to streamline this to make sure the right cases are the ones brought forward. In extreme and dangerous cases, that probably is the case. Perhaps there are other cases where it might not be, so we have to discuss that. For example, seniors who live with early-stage dementia often maintain independent lives. In some cases, their families may prefer that their medical privacy be protected as they engage in the search in the early stages. We will discuss this as part of the notification system, and I am sure we will find a collaborative solution that will work for everybody in this House.
One of the problems I wanted to mention, which I have heard from our provincial counterparts, some municipal counterparts and police, is the concern over alert fatigue. Through discussions with the provinces and territories, we want to make sure that alert fatigue does not happen. I often get complaints from people in Montreal asking why they get alerts about a child who is missing in Trois-Rivières, given the unlikelihood of the child from Trois-Rivières being in Montreal, with the phone buzzing at three o'clock in the morning. Part of this must be to figure out where the alert target area should be and what the alerts should be.
I also want to talk a bit about dementia care, because this bill brings up an important issue about dementia. The Alzheimer Society provided recommendations in its landmark study released in 2022. The Government of Canada's “A Dementia Strategy for Canada”, released in 2019, looks at not only prevention, medical treatment and cures, but also improving the quality of life of dementia patients. Many stakeholders have expressed stronger support for programs such as dementia-friendly communities led by the Alzheimer Society of Canada, with financial support from our government. This initiative supports localized efforts to implement and adapt dementia-friendly practices, including promoting awareness and strategies on how to effectively communicate with people living with dementia. For example, exactly as the member said, when we see a senior who we think might be lost, confused and scared, how do we approach them? Should we approach them? These are all things we need to teach our communities. It has to be more than just alerting family members of people who have dementia as to how to deal with dementia patients.
In January 2026, our government announced $4.7 million in funding to fund six projects under the dementia community investment program, bringing the total number of projects we have supported to 36.
[Translation]
Our government often talks about our commitment to ensuring the safety and dignity of all Canadians. Seniors built the communities we live and thrive in today. We owe it to them to keep them safe in all of our communities.
[English]
In conclusion, I look forward to working with the sponsor of this bill to ensure that a national approach to silver alerts is evidence-based and adequately addresses community needs and provincial concerns.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, this being Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month, my thoughts go out to my friend Marie-Andrée, who is courageously battling this disease despite the difficulties she faces. I always think of my friend Marie-Andrée when we recognize Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month, because we obviously need more donations and grants to advance the research, so I want her to know I am thinking of her.
Today, we are discussing a bill on a very important topic. I have devoted my entire career to serving seniors, especially those in the process of losing their independence, first as a social worker and then as a manager within Quebec's health and social services network. I am well aware of the issues facing people living with dementia, and I am also well informed about the consequences of having a loved one with dementia. I am therefore pleased, if I may say so, to congratulate the member for introducing a private member's bill on this topic.
Basically, we have a lot of questions. We are all in favour of an alert, but we have a lot of questions. The first is that I do not understand how a coordinated system across the country could improve the Quebec system. A former spokesperson for the Montreal police said that there could be up to 12 reports of missing seniors in Montreal every day. I cannot imagine an alarm going off on people's phones every time a senior is reported missing.
I have a lot of questions and I hope that we will be able to discuss them with the member to better understand. I do not know whether she intends to use the same system as the Amber alert. In my opinion, that might not necessarily be appropriate for those with dementia, particularly because people may become desensitized and stop paying attention to such alerts if they start receiving a large number of them on their cellphones.
I am asking a lot of questions this evening to try to learn more. As the member from Quebec said, Quebec has been using the Amber alert system since 2019. At that time, Liberal minister Marguerite Blais put a pilot project in place and, because of a recent tragedy in Quebec, the silver alert program rolled out across Quebec in February 2026.
On April 17, someone from my riding went out for a drive. When a person has frontotemporal dementia, for example, they may appear to be perfectly capable and functional. They are even capable of driving, but there comes a point when they end up completely lost while driving. The alert was triggered quickly, and in just three or four hours, Ontario police found the person on the road and immediately brought them to safety. This is proof that the Quebec system works very well. It is even a model for several other provinces.
Since Quebec and Ontario are neighbours, there is a great deal of co-operation and a long-standing tradition of collaboration, I would say, between the Sûreté du Québec and Ontario police forces to ensure a rapid response. As the member said, in order to locate someone, we need to minimize delays and act quickly. I wonder what a national framework might mean for response times in Quebec and Ontario. I see it creating more complications or adding more red tape that could slow down a system that already works quite well in Quebec.
That said, I am willing to speak with the member and with the Bloc Québécois critic for seniors, the member for Shefford, to better understand her intentions. If the goal is to emulate best practices in Ontario and Quebec and encourage other provinces to do more, I would gladly have that discussion, but I still need to be convinced of how this approach would benefit Quebec.
There are, after all, organizations that represent many seniors in Quebec. Naturally, they cannot oppose a bill aimed at promoting the well-being of seniors. However, they do have some concerns about the federal government imposing additional requirements. They fear that things will become more complicated. That is what the FADOQ and the AQDR in Quebec have stated quite clearly. I agree with the member. This is not about engaging in a partisan debate between the right and the left. That is not the issue. When things are going well in a province and neither community groups nor police forces are calling for changes to a system that is working, I wonder if this bill a good solution, particularly for Quebec. I remain open to being convinced. Obviously, if the provinces want to adopt a single system, that is their prerogative. It is their decision, and we cannot oppose that.
We believe that the provinces are in the best position to implement the criteria to trigger an alert, because they control and coordinate their police and health care systems. Unlike many provinces, Quebec has its own police force, the Sûreté du Québec, which is similar to Ontario's police force, the OPP. Quebec has developed its own communications practice. Could this collaboration, which has been built by experience, be weakened by adding an additional layer with the goal of creating a national approach? Trying to do so often makes the process more complicated. I am not sure whether the Sûreté du Québec or even the Government of Quebec would be willing to reopen the issue of standards, given that Quebec has just adopted its own. Shortly after they were adopted, we had examples of seniors with dementia being found quickly because the silver alert is truly meant to alert the public. The decision of whether to issue an alert is up to the police force, which would be the Sûreté du Québec in this case.
I would love to meet with my colleague from Kildonan—St. Paul so I can understand how this bill would benefit Quebec's seniors and so we can start a conversation on this issue. She should also understand that, at present, we are neither for nor against her bill. We are more in an exploratory phase, because we feel that the member's speech, as well as the answers she gave to questions, are not yet comprehensive enough to allow me to continue my deliberations.
I would like to congratulate my colleague on introducing this bill, which does address the important need to protect older people and those with dementia who need the wider community to look after them. I invite her to come and discuss this with me and our seniors critic, the member for Shefford, so that we can better understand her intentions and, above all, so that she can reassure us about the model she wishes to develop. The model differs from Amber alerts. As my colleague from Mont-Royal says, we certainly do not want Quebeckers to become desensitized, because they are used to seeing Amber alerts for missing children or very serious disappearances. If we increase the number of alerts, they might think that it is just a false alarm, no big deal, and then they might let their guard down. We want to avoid that at all costs.
I invite my colleague to come speak to us and continue the conversation.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my colleague, the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, for bringing forward this exceptionally important bill. She has done meaningful work on this issue, including sponsoring a petition that garnered over 7,300 signatures.
This legislation represents another step forward in responding to a very real and growing concern facing Canadians. Bill C-263, the silver alert national framework act, speaks to something that is very simple, but it is also very urgent. Tens of thousands of vulnerable seniors living with dementia go missing every year in Canada. When that happens, every minute matters.
Canada is undergoing a significant demographic shift, and our population is aging rapidly. By 2030, over 1 million Canadians are expected to be living with dementia, rising to 1.7 million by 2050. That estimate comes from national research by the Alzheimer Society of Canada, which tracks how quickly dementia rates are rising as our population ages. With this rise in cases of missing elderly persons, there is great concern as baby boomers are aging.
New data shows that one in four seniors over 85 has a form of dementia, which is resulting in more seniors wandering away from home. Senior advocacy groups state that the preliminary data being collected shows that between 50,000 to 60,000 people out of the nearly 1 million Canadians with dementia are reported missing each year, and these numbers are rising.
Families and communities across the country are already dealing with this reality, trying desperately to keep loved ones safe while navigating the uncertainty dementia causes every day. This pressure will only increase in the years ahead. Those who know someone living with dementia understand how quickly a routine walk can become disorienting, how everyday surroundings can suddenly feel unfamiliar and how easily someone can lose their way. They live with the constant fear that a loved one could wander and not know how to get home. Caregivers are often carrying far more responsibilities and worries than people realize. Many describe living with this constant fear, wondering whether it is safe to step away, to run an errand or to allow themselves just a few moments for self-care.
The first hour after someone goes missing is often marked with hesitation. Caregivers check familiar places, call neighbours, retrace routes and only later realize how much time has passed. Those early moments are filled with uncertainty. By the time they reach out for help, valuable time has already slipped away. It is said that, if an older person is gone for more than 24 hours, there is only a fifty-fifty chance that they will be found safe, making this a matter of life and death. When a loved one does go missing, caregivers frequently shoulder an immense emotional burden. They replay decisions, question their judgment and carry guilt, even when they did nothing wrong.
For many years, I worked closely with nursing homes and seniors and heard directly from staff and families about the daily realities of caring for people living with dementia. One concern that is mentioned is how often individuals find a way to wander. In many cases, the outcomes were fortunate, and someone was found at a bus stop, a coffee shop, or on a walk on a familiar route. However, there are also cases with far more serious consequences, where delays in locating someone led to harm that could have been prevented. Those experiences underscore the importance of early notification and a system that responds quickly when the unexpected happens.
When a vulnerable senior goes missing, families do not experience time in the usual way. Every minute feels longer. Every moment carries the weight of uncertainty. Families search. They make the calls. They are pacing. Above all, they hope someone somewhere will be able to help bring their loved one back home safely. Police, search and rescue teams, and first responders do extraordinary work in these situations. They search large and unfamiliar areas, coordinate volunteers, review camera footage and track movement patterns while racing daylight, weather and long tiring hours.
In many cases, responders work across multiple jurisdictions. The local municipal police force, provincial resources and community volunteer search teams are all trying to piece together the same information at the same time. Conflicting alerts slow this coordination, and delays widen the search area. First responders consistently tell us the same thing, which is that a clear, national framework would help responders narrow their focus sooner and act with greater precision. Early, accurate public awareness makes a huge difference on the ground.
The bill is inspired, in part, by a very unfortunate tragedy that occurred in Winnipeg in 2023, which was when Mr. Earl Moberg went missing. Mr. Moberg was an 81-year-old husband, father and grandfather who disappeared from his home and was never found. In the wake of that loss, his family acted. They launched a petition calling for the implementation of a silver alert system so no other family would have to endure that same heartbreak.
Bill C-263 would require the federal government to work collaboratively with territories, provinces and police services to establish a national standard and coordination for silver alerts. Provinces and territories already take the lead in policing and emergency response, and the legislation would respect that reality. The federal role would ensure that the systems align, that information flows and that standards are shared. The goal of the legislation is straightforward: Canadians' being notified quickly when a vulnerable senior goes missing, in order to bring them home safely.
In my community of Cambridge, and in communities across this country, people understand what it means to look out for each other during moments of crisis. We see it when neighbours check in, when local businesses stay alert and when people step up to help when they know what to look for. However, good intentions alone do not help families when a vulnerable senior has disappeared. They must be supported by systems that allow accurate information to reach the public without delay so people can respond constructively rather than react after the fact.
These challenges are often more acute in rural and smaller communities. Distances are greater, lighting can be limited, and familiar landmarks can disappear quickly when someone moves beyond a town centre. A person can travel well outside a safe radius without even being noticed. In those settings, rapid public notification would allow our farmers, shopkeepers, drivers and neighbours to stay alert in real time. A national approach would ensure that geography does not determine how quickly a family receives support.
Canadians pay attention to public alerts because they are reserved for serious situations. Canadians are already familiar with the value of a coordinated alert system through the Amber Alert program. We have seen how quickly it mobilizes the public and how effective it can be. Lives have been saved because communities were notified early.
Bill C-263 recognizes that seniors living with dementia deserve the same level of urgency and public communication when they go missing. Canada already has the tools needed to do this. The national public alerting system can issue rapid, geo-targeted alerts across cellphones, radio and television. This bill would not create something new. It would enhance the use of what is already in place.
A national framework for silver alerts would help establish shared standards, clear processes and reliable coordination across jurisdictions. It would support first responders and communities by ensuring that information is timely and actionable. The bill speaks directly to families searching for a loved one, caregivers waiting for news, first responders working against the clock, and communities willing to help when they are informed. Dementia may change the way someone sees the world, but it should not change the way the world sees them.
The difference between a coordinated response and a delayed one can be the difference between bringing someone home safe or never having that chance again. The legislation would allow Parliament to respond more effectively when families need our help the most.
I encourage all members of the House to give Bill C-263, the silver alert national framework act, thoughtful consideration and to work together so that when a vulnerable senior goes missing, Canadians are prepared to respond, because every minute matters.
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today, as someone who represents an area where a lot of attention has been drawn to the issue because of an outstanding individual in a very sad situation.
When we have discussions or debates inside the House, they take many different forms. On this legislation that has been brought forward, there is a great deal of interest. I am anticipating that after today, there might be another hour of debate, but eventually we will see the legislation go to committee. It reinforces something that the government has been talking a great deal about: Working in collaboration, we can do some wonderful things for Canadians.
Last week we had Bailey's law. With the support of both sides of the House, we were able to advance that legislation.
Today, in talking to the ministry, and the minister in particular, we understand and appreciate that here we have legislation that, in principle, the government can support. We would like to see the legislation go to committee. There are some areas of concern, not only for the government but for other stakeholders, that need to be discussed. I think it was important to hear the introducer of Bill C-263 indicate that she is open to amendments. We will get to some of those shortly.
We have seen ideas that can have a very real impact, and there is a sense of collaboration. When we have government and opposition working together, wonderful things can happen, whether it is a private member's bill or a government bill.
We have before us an example. Earl Moberg was 81 years old and had dementia. Back in December 2023, he went missing in Winnipeg. It was amazing, in of the bit of research I was able to do while the debate was going on, how the community came together in a very wonderful way to try to support the family.
Today, Britt Moberg is on Parliament Hill. She has been an ongoing, strong advocate and is ensuring that politicians at all levels, of all political stripes, will not forget about her dad. I give my best wishes to the family and the community that have been affected. I am thinking of the family and their friends in particular. There was a great deal of energy, and one can only imagine the frustration of not being able to have that final closure. I hope there will come a day when that final closure will be there for the family.
Dementia is a very serious health condition. It is one of the reasons that we, as a government, have invested in community involvement. Dementia community investments are something to which the Prime Minister and the government have provided substantial amounts of money, recognizing that we need more community engagement and more awareness on the dementia file.
When we think of jurisdictional responsibility, we often hear about provinces and the federal government, but all levels of government have a role to play. There is also the police, in this case. Whether urban or rural, usually law enforcement officers in one form or another will become engaged, along with community volunteers, community groups and, of course, family and friends.
We can only imagine the impact it has when a loved one with dementia, whether they are living in a family home or a short-term or long-term care facility, goes for a walk and does not return. There is a certain amount of alert awareness brought to the community, which has already been highlighted, and that is a good thing. What is being proposed about having it go through telephones, for example, in the same fashion as Amber alerts, has a great deal of merit. I am very much interested in hearing what others have to say.
I believe the Alzheimer Society of Canada estimated that in the next number of years, close to one million Canadians will have some form of dementia. We had another speaker talk about the level of frequency. Those are some legitimate numbers. As parliamentarians, in particular members of the standing committee that will have to deal with this, working with the department, we should be looking at the numbers to ensure that we put in the very best mechanism we can.
As it has been illustrated, a quick and safe recovery is a priority. We all want to see that. There is an obligation for it. The member proposing the piece of legislation has a limited number of questions that can be asked of her because of time limits, but my curiosity is about trying to narrow down how we can work with other jurisdictions in dealing with some of those raw numbers. These are absolutely critical for us to know so we can be as effective as we can in making sure there is a quick and safe recovery of every senior who goes missing. We owe it to the senior, and we owe it to the family and friends.
I have had a relatively recent experience with a gentleman I have known for over 30 years, Fred De Villa, a wonderful community member who was cared for in a very big way. In recent months, he sadly has passed. Dementia quickly consumed him and had such a significant negative impact, but the people around him, family and friends, wanted to be there for Fred in a very real and tangible way, as we see from family members who are there for loved ones with dementia, as well as from health care facilities and, more importantly, from the staff, with the caring attitudes and love they express to individuals with dementia.
It is important that we recognize and appreciate the efforts of so many who are there to directly support individuals who have succumbed to dementia, and we can support them in different ways. We can support them, as the government has done, financially, by providing supports for dementia community investment opportunities. I think there are three dozen projects out there today from the government. We can also look at legislation such as this one. At the very least, let us see it go to committee.
We also need to recognize that maybe there is more that other levels of government can do, and we do need to continue the collaboration. There is more that I would like to express in the second hour of debate.
Adjournment Proceedings
[Adjournment Proceedings]
[English]
Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to be at the late show to follow up on some questions that need to be answered.
Last week, Conservatives called an emergency meeting of the health committee to investigate the $300 million the Liberals wasted on PrescribeIT. When we moved a motion to call on the Auditor General to investigate the program, the Liberal parliamentary secretary for health moved a motion to turn off the committee cameras.
My question is simple: Why did the Liberals turn off the cameras?
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, Canada Health Infoway has received funding from the Government of Canada for 25 years. That is 25 years of Liberal and Conservative governments alike recognizing that we need to come together with the provinces and territories to jointly fund an organization that promotes improving our health data infrastructure. This collaboration with provinces and territories is essential in a country like Canada, where health care falls under provincial jurisdiction. This means that we need to work together, alongside the provinces and territories, ensuring that our health care system responds to the needs of all Canadians.
That is why the previous government worked with Infoway and the provinces and territories to launch PrescribeIT in 2017. The federal government heard from our provincial and territorial partners that our health care data was being held back by a long-standing dependence on paper and fax to transmit prescriptions. We should not be relying on fax machines at a time when information is so easily accessible.
To try to address this challenge, the previous government provided seed funding to Health Canada Infoway for a program that would replace this outdated reliance on fax machines. This was never intended to be long-term, ongoing funding. From the beginning, the plan was for PrescribeIT to become self-sufficient. Nearly a decade later, it was clear this plan had failed. While nearly 11 million prescriptions were fulfilled last year using PrescribeIT, that number is only 5% of prescriptions across Canada. Doctors and pharmacies alike did not use the system.
Our new government came into office and took a look at what was working and what was not. Based on our careful review, we saw that there was no path for PrescribeIT to become financially sustainable, and we ended the funding for the program.
The Conservatives seem to think there is something wrong with ending a program that has low uptake, but the fact is that our new government takes its role as steward and custodian of taxpayer dollars very seriously, especially when it comes to health care. We are committed to focusing on resources where those dollars will deliver the greatest benefit to patients and our health care system.
Mr. Speaker, I am sort of confused, because yesterday at the health committee, the board chair of Health Infoway actually said that the program was a success, yet the Liberal government has been shutting it down. However, it still managed to spend $300 million and was still sending fax messages after 10 years.
I will go back to my original question: Why did the parliamentary secretary for health vote to turn off the cameras at the health committee while we were investigating the $300 million spent on PrescribeIT? Why did she turn off the cameras?
Mr. Speaker, it sounds like the Conservatives seem to think the government should continue funding programs that are not being used. A previous government worked with Infoway and our provincial and territorial partners to launch PrescribeIT, because that is what the provinces and territories said was needed. A decade later, it was clear that doctors and pharmacies were not using the system, so we ended funding for it.
Our government will always work to ensure we are delivering programs for policies that are smarter, faster and more effective for all Canadians. That means, in health care, that it works for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to speak about a scandal that is only growing in size, complexity and cost to taxpayers.
The Liberals' PrescribeIT was launched in 2016, promising to put every prescription in Canada into a digital system, allowing our pharmacies to move off their reliance on fax machines. At least $300 million in taxpayer dollars was spent in the following decade in pursuit of this goal. The result was complete failure. This taxpayer-funded boondoggle failed to fill even 5% of all prescriptions and cannot be shown to have replaced a single fax machine. It is now being shut down entirely, with the few partners who used it now likely to have to find someone who can reinstall a fax machine in 2026.
Canada did not invent e-prescription services. Health care systems and private firms around the world have upgraded their prescription systems from fax machines to serve doctors, pharmacists and patients better. We did not have to reinvent the wheel. Only in Canada and only under the Liberal government could yet another government-funded IT project create absolutely nothing of benefit to Canadians.
It is another ArriveCAN, except with an even higher price tag for taxpayers. In the time that I have spent in the House and on the health committee, it has become apparent to me how much better $300 million could have been spent on our health care system. It could have gone toward health transfers to British Columbia, to hire dozens more doctors, nurses and specialists, especially for rural regions like mine that suffer constant closures of many of our emergency rooms for lack of staff. It could have gone toward treatment beds, to give people with addiction in my province a path to recovery.
Instead, it was hundreds of millions handed off to a quasi-governmental agency, Canada Health Infoway, in partnership with Telus, with nothing to show for it and the vast majority of the IP created left in private hands rather than the public interest.
This disastrous waste of taxpayer money on the Liberals' $300-million PrescribeIT deserves a full investigation but Conservative attempts to do so have been stonewalled every step of the way. When I questioned Michael Green, the CEO in charge of the agency that oversaw PrescribeIT, Canada Health Infoway, about what went wrong, he could not provide a straight answer despite having worked on the failed Liberal program for 10 years.
When I asked how much he was paid, he refused to answer, saying that it was in the public record, but, as his own board chair later admitted, that was a lie. Mr. Green's compensation was not public at that time. There is a reason he wanted it that way. He was paid almost $900,000 when we include the hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses and a taxpayer-funded car.
Between our first and last meetings on this topic, the board of Canada Health Infoway fired Mr. Green to prevent him from returning to answer questions.
Was the $300 million spent on PrescribeIT a good use of taxpayer dollars, considering that it did not permanently eliminate a single fax machine?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for her question, and I will say many of the things to her that I said to the member's colleagues.
As my colleague knows, PrescribeIT was launched by the previous government in collaboration with Canada Health Infoway, the provinces and territories because it saw that there was a need for it. The provinces and territories wanted to move doctors and pharmacies away from using fax machines and toward a system where important health care data could be sent electronically.
Infoway was chosen for the job because it had received funding from Liberal and Conservative governments alike since 2001. The organization has long been a place for federal, provincial and territorial governments to come together to work on improving Canada's health data infrastructure. The resulting program, PrescribeIT, was launched in 2017, following extensive consultations with the provinces and territories.
It is important to note that the goal was never to have the federal government fund PrescribeIT indefinitely. From the outset, the plan was for the program to be self-funded over time. This meant that, when our new government came into office last year, we took a hard look at what was working and what was not working. We take our responsibility as stewards and watchdogs for taxpayer dollars very seriously. We saw that PrescribeIT did not have the level of pick up that was expected when it launched nearly a decade ago.
As was mentioned, only 5% of prescriptions were filled using the system. Rather than continuing to fund a program that no one was using, we decided to end funding for PrescribeIT. At a time when Canadians expect that we will spend health care dollars wisely and carefully, we wanted to make sure that we were investing taxpayer money in a way that delivers the greatest benefit to patients and the health system alike.
Are there questions about the future of lnfoway following this decision? Of course there are. That is why we are refocusing government spending and ensuring that Canada Health lnfoway focuses on what it was intended to do, which is to build up Canada's health data infrastructure and support the development of national health data standards. This work is important, and it speaks to the future of Canada's health care system.
Canadians deserve and expect a system that meets their needs and adapts to the world as the flow of information changes. Our government will always be there for Canadians, for our health care sector, and for our provincial and territorial partners, to make sure that we are helping to deliver health care in a way that puts the needs of patients first.
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians deserve is transparency. Conservatives want to get to the bottom of how $300 million of taxpayer money was wasted on this project, PrescribeIT.
When Conservatives demanded that Mr. Green return to the committee to account for the millions of tax dollars that he had been paid for no results, the Liberals voted us down. When the Bloc moved to have the Liberal health minister appear within the next month to testify to her role in this scandal, Liberals ended our meeting entirely. When Conservatives moved to call on the Auditor General of Canada, a non-partisan official, to investigate, the Liberals moved to turn off the camera and seal the records of that committee for the next 30 years.
My question is simple: Why did the Liberals turn off the camera and seal the records of that meeting for the next 30 years?
Mr. Speaker, let us focus on the facts of this situation. The previous government launched a program in 2017 that was intended to become self-sufficient over time. After 10 years, it was clear that doctors and pharmacists were not using the program and that it had no path to self-sufficiency. As our government takes its role of defending taxpayer dollars seriously, we decided to end funding for the program.
Our new government will always make sure that we are focusing resources and investments so they deliver the greatest benefit to patients and our health care system.
The hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South not being present to raise during Adjournment Proceedings the matter for which notice has been given, the notice is deemed withdrawn.
The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 6:55 p.m.)
Publication Explorer
Publication Explorer