House Publications

     moved for leave to introduce Bill C‑278, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act.

    He said: Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to address floor crossing, with thanks to the hon. member for Vancouver East for seconding.

    It is elementary that, in a democracy, elections are the primary opportunity for voters to express their democratic choice. When parliamentarians cross the floor to join a different party from the one they were elected with, they unilaterally alter the will of their electors. The corrosive effects in our democracy are profound: Voters lose trust in elections, the prospect that MPs have been enticed by backroom deals emerges, and the idea that only government members get resources for their constituencies brings pork barrel politics to the table.

    Recently, the very balance of power in the House was changed, not by voters at the ballot box but by political operatives in back rooms. While that may not be illegal, it is undeniably undemocratic.

    The bill would not ban floor crossing nor the ability to sit as an independent member. The latter is a valid protection against party oppression and to preserve matters of conscience. The bill would simply require those members who wish to join another party's caucus to seek the approval of their constituents through a by‑election. If an MP who wishes to join another party believes they have valid reasons for doing so, they should have no problem putting that choice to the test of their voters, where it should be.

    I urge all members to support this important measure to protect the democratic rights of Canadian voters.

     moved for leave to introduce C‑279, An Act to repeal the Clarity Act.

    She said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to introduce Bill C‑279, an act to repeal the Clarity Act. This bill simply seeks to repeal the federal Clarity Act, which allows Parliament to override the will of the people by a simple majority vote of 50% plus one.

    The Clarity Act does two things. First, it allows the House of Commons to determine whether a referendum question is sufficiently clear before a referendum takes place. This is particularly paternalistic and impugns the intelligence of the public by assuming that people are unable to think for themselves and understand a question. Second, following a referendum, the Clarity Act allows the House to rule that the majority was not clear, that there was no majority because of the turnout, the percentage of votes in favour of the secessionist option or the substance of the debates. In short, the House of Commons can tell millions of people that their voice did not count based on 343 votes in the House with a potential majority of a few votes off from 50% plus one.

    Bill C‑279 also aims to uphold certain basic democratic principles, which were reiterated by the National Assembly of Quebec when it voted unanimously in favour of the principle. That means both federalists and separatists, across all parties, are rejecting the Clarity Act and pointing out that 50% plus one is a clear majority and that, in the case of Quebec, it is up to Quebec alone to decide its future.

    Again, our bill is simple. It simply aims to repeal the abomination and democratic aberration that is the Clarity Act.

    Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to present a petition on behalf of constituents.

    I rise for the 12th time on behalf of the people of Dauphin, Manitoba, to present a petition on the rising rate of crime. Residents of Dauphin and the Parkland region are demanding that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on-crime policies that have fuelled a surge in crime throughout their communities. Since 2015, there has been a 54% increase in violent crime and a 75% increase in sexual assaults across Canada.

    Petitioners are deeply concerned by what they read in the local papers, including a November report that the Dauphin RCMP is searching for a wanted man with three separate arrest warrants. Our once safe communities have now turned into places where people fear for their life because the government's catch-and-release policies have allowed violent repeat offenders to be out on bail instead of in jail.

    The people of Dauphin and the Parkland region demand that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on-crime policies that directly threaten their livelihoods and their community. I fully support the good people of Dauphin.

    Mr. Speaker, I rise for the good people of Simcoe—Grey and, more precisely, Clearview Township. I have a petition to present with respect to a deep concern within the community.

    The Department of National Defence has purchased 700 acres of prime farmland to build an over-the-horizon radar system. That is phase one. In order for phase two to be successful, it needs up to another 3,000 acres. The residents in that area have been asked to sell. They have no interest. Their fear is expropriation, similar to what happened with the Alto rail line. There are deep concerns because it is prime farmland. It is also right beside the Minesing Wetlands, an extreme environmental spot.

    The petitioners do not think the department has looked at all options in other locations with respect to this. Therefore, they are asking that it stop the building of the over-the-horizon radar site on the already purchased property, prevent future acquisition of prime farmland in building an over-the-horizon site, and register the previously purchased property with the Ontario Farmland Trust to preserve its agricultural status.

    Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions.

    The first petition is from constituents in Burlington who want to reaffirm their support for the Canada-wide early learning and child care system.

    The petitioners request that all future budgets include adequate funding that keeps up with inflation and allows for the growth of the program. They believe it is essential to the healthy development of children, to the economic value of women entering the labour force, and to the alleviation of the affordability crisis that is affecting the well-being of families and communities across Canada. They deeply believe in the Canada-wide early learning and child care program, and they ask that the House affirm its belief in the program as well.

    Mr. Speaker, the second is an e-petition, in which petitioners note that in January 2026, widespread human rights protests in Iran were met with state violence, including arrests, torture, enforced disappearances and the killing of 30,000-plus civilians. They state that the Iranian regime simultaneously shut down the Internet and telecoms, stifling witnesses and victims and preventing access for Iranians to reliable information and communications abroad.

    The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to publicly condemn the Islamic regime's ongoing human rights violations that use state violence and the shutdown of digital communications and telecommunications. They demand the immediate restoration of Internet access and telecoms to ensure governmental transparency and civilian safety, the cessation of lethal force against Iranian dissidents, and the release of all political prisoners and detainees. They publicly support the Iranian people's right to determine their own political future free from violence and repression.

    Petitioners call on the government to expand targeted sanctions, to enforce accountability measures against the people responsible for human rights abuses, and to pursue the above actions with international partners that support R2P.

    Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present today. The first is from the good people of Vancouver Kingsway.

     Over 600 residents signed a petition pointing out that the military strikes on Iran have caused significant civilian casualties and widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, water systems and heritage sites. They point out that the war threatens irreversible harm to the civilian population, including children, women and political prisoners, and poses grave risks to regional stability.

    The petitioners want the House to know that Iran's future must be determined by Iranians themselves, free from both foreign military intervention and domestic repression. They are calling on the Canadian government to urgently advocate for an immediate ceasefire and an end to all military strikes on Iranian territory, and to use Canada's influence to facilitate a durable regional peace through multilateral engagement.

    Mr. Speaker, the second petition is signed by over 30,000 Canadians who point out that the Canadian Charter of Rights exists to protect individuals and minority communities from discriminatory laws.

     The petitioners are concerned about recent legislation enacted by the Government of Alberta and the Government of Saskatchewan that, in their view, restricts the rights, dignity and safety of transgender and gender-diverse people, particularly children and youth, including access to gender-affirming and medically appropriate health care.

     The petitioners note that the provincial governments have invoked the notwithstanding clause to shield that legislation from judicial review, thus preventing charter challenges. The petitioners call on the House to urge the government to exercise its disallowance power under section 90 of the Constitution Act to better protect the rights of transgender and gender‑diverse people in Canada.

     Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise on behalf of the people of Richmond Hill South and the almost 10,000 people across Canada who have signed this petition.

    The petitioners are concerned about when a member of Parliament crossing the floor to join a different political party significantly alters the representation chosen by the electorate without providing voters the opportunity to reconsider that choice. Partisan affiliation can undermine democratic accountability, and Canadian citizens and residents require a formal mechanism to hold members of Parliament accountable when a fundamental change in party membership occurs mid‑term.

     Therefore, the petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to introduce legislation to, number one, establish a recall mechanism for any member of Parliament who leaves their caucus to join another political party; number two, mandate that a recall petition process be automatically triggered within an electoral district once a member of Parliament formally joins a different political party than the one under which they were elected; number three, establish a requirement that if a recall petition receives signatures equivalent to at least 20% of the total votes cast in that riding during the previous federal election within 90 days, the seat shall be automatically vacated; and number four, require that a by-election be called immediately following a successful recall petition, to allow voters to determine their representation under the altered circumstances.

    Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to table a petition signed by many people across Vancouver Island and across Canada.

    The petitioners highlight that approximately 165,000 new cases of brain injury are happening annually in Canada and that health and community service providers require more education regarding the intersection of brain injury, mental health and addiction.

     The petitioners also highlight that survivors and families are often left to navigate fragmented systems, with little to no support, leading to further deterioration in health, housing and economic stability. They have been calling for this to be in the budget, and they are hoping it will in the budget this fall.

     The petitioners also support Bill C‑206, my bill to develop a national strategy to support and improve brain injury awareness, prevention and treatment, as well as the rehabilitation and recovery of persons living with brain injury.

    Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand, please.

     Is it agreed?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    [For text of questions and responses, see Written Questions website]

     moved:

     He said: Mr. Speaker, I am going to be splitting my time with my great friend, and a decent hockey player, the member for Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley.

    Where is this Prime Minister? He has been hiding, ducking and dodging since Friday morning. This is the guy who was supposed to be a master negotiator, the guy who would get a deal done. He said he was the guy who would get Canada back on track, and he said he was the man with the plan. However, it all turned out to be a sham at the end of the day because on Friday morning, Canadians got the devastating news of something that they have already been feeling in the last 10 years under the incompetent Liberal government: Canada is in a full-blown Liberal recession.

     In fact, this Liberal Prime Minister is the only leader in the entire G7 to drive the economy into a full-blown recession. All of the other G7 countries face the exact same external pressures and the exact same tariffs. Why is it that this Prime Minister, who was supposed to be the guy, plunged our economy into a recession? In fact, in the entire OECD, Canada is one of only two countries that are in a recession now.

     Liberal pundits and their paid media keep saying this is just a technical recession. What is a technical recession? This full-blown Liberal recession meets the criteria with two consecutive quarters in a shrinking economy, but let us look at the time since this Prime Minister took power. In three out of the four quarters since he became Prime Minister, the economy has shrunk. Business investment has declined for five straight quarters and $20 billion of net investment has fled the country since he became Prime Minister. Just in the first three months of this year, 120,000 jobs are gone and 48,000 of those people are still looking for work.

     This Prime Minister delivered to Canada the second-worst unemployment rate in the entire G7. He is the worst when it comes to housing costs. In the entire G7, Canada, under this Prime Minister, is the worst when it comes to household debt. Let us dig into that a bit. What does this recession mean? It may be technical to the paid media, but in Canadian terms, it is the single mom who has to put groceries back because she cannot afford them or she has to buy in portions every week because the cost of living has skyrocketed under the Liberals. Including food costs and housing costs, everyday life is more expensive because of Liberal taxes and the failure of Liberal policies.

     It is the dad in Windsor who has lost his job. He is one of the 120,000 people who, in the first three months of this year under the Liberal government, lost their job. He has to sit around the dinner table explaining to the kids how many things they cannot do over the summer and how many vacations they cannot have because he is more worried about how he is going to pay the bills, pay the mortgage or rent and put food on that table. It is the mom who just got laid off and was barely hanging on. It could be one of the majority of Canadians who are just $200 away from insolvency. It could be one of those 2.2 million Canadians who are waiting in a food bank line every single month, and that number might even go up now because of the job losses under the current government.

     This Prime Minister sold himself to be something different. He said he would not be like the previous guy. He is actually worse, so he is right in one sense. Not only is he spending more, if one can believe that. He doubled the deficit that Justin Trudeau left. Then, he corrected himself in the update and became the second-worst as well, having the second-worst deficit in Canadian history outside COVID. That means more costs, more debt and more taxes on Canadians. It is more of the same and it is all on the Canadian credit card. He does not care. This guy is better at going around and shaking a lot of hands, signing a bunch of fake papers and jet-setting around the world. However, it does not just stop at jet-setting around the world. He makes sure he has the finest meals on those planes. In fact, he just recently spent $200,000 on fine dining on those plane rides.

     While Canadians are lining up in record numbers at food banks, and the food banks are even running out of food now, the Prime Minister gets to live lavishly, jet-setting around the world, pretending he is doing something. After all that showboating and all of that show, at the end of the day, he has plunged Canada's economy into a full-blown Liberal recession. There are families who are affected and who had been affected before.

     In fact, in the business community, for consecutive quarters, there are more businesses closing in Canada than are opening. Business insolvencies are up. People are starting to miss their mortgage and credit card payments. The cost of everyday life has only gotten worse under the incompetent Liberal Prime Minister. In fact, if we look at debt loads, Canada has the highest debt load in the entire G7. Because of Liberal policies, the costs of food and housing are way up, and just those two pieces alone now make up about 120% of one person's income. That means someone's entire paycheque gets eaten up and then they have to either borrow, or put on credit, for food or other essentials. Then, that just piles up, and they start missing payments, which is exactly what is happening now.

     The number of defaults, delinquencies and insolvencies are all up. We have not seen some of these numbers since 2009, when we literally had a global financial crisis, and the difference back then was that we had a really responsible Conservative government that knew where to spend money and that knew how to create jobs at the time. We never saw an inflation crisis the last time this happened. I do not remember an inflation crisis. I do not remember interest rates spiking at the highest and fastest rate in Canadian history. That medal goes to the incompetent Liberal government, because all it does is spend, spend, spend, because it does not mean anything to the government.

     The Prime Minister is more concerned about his banker, bondholder and Brookfield buddies than he is about the average everyday Canadian. In fact, he is the same Prime Minister who sold the illusion that he was the guy who was going to deal with Donald Trump. He was all “elbows up”. Now everything is down, including our economy. We are in a recession, and now the Prime Minister is on team Trump. In fact, now he is parroting Donald Trump. Now it is “make America great again”. However, I ask, “What about Canada?” We might as well get the Prime Minister a MAGA hat.

    What we are asking for today is that the incompetent Liberal Prime Minister present a plan, stop hiding and come out of the witness protection program. He is supposed to be leading this G7 country, the same one that he has driven into a recession. He must tell Canadians what his plan is.

     Conservatives have a plan. If the Liberals want a plan that will help us get out of this mess that they created, they can take our plan and take credit for it. They can put their stamp on it, and at least Canadians would have a future that is more safe and more affordable. Conservatives would end the antidevelopment laws that the Liberals passed, like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which does not let our product leave the west coast and does not let pipelines get built. We would get rid of the industrial carbon tax, which makes the cost of everything more expensive. We would lower taxes for individuals, small businesses and corporations, so we can create the business environment that we need. We would introduce a law so that, any time a Canadian company reinvests its capital gains in Canada, they would not have to pay those capital gains taxes. They could defer them, so we could create better jobs and a better economy right here in Canada.

     Of course, we would put an end to all the Liberal waste: the billions and billions of dollars that go to Liberal-connected insiders in consultant fees because the Liberal ministers are too incompetent to create plans of their own, and the boondoggle of a project that is Alto. The government, for a project that has not even started yet, has already shovelled out millions in bonuses. We would put an end to this Liberal corruption.

     The Liberals can take our plan. Let us get working for Canadians together. It is time for the Prime Minister to come out of hiding and present a plan.

    Madam Speaker, it would be a lot easier to take the Conservatives at their word if they did not seem giddy about the fact that we are in the position we are in. On Friday, right after Statistics Canada had announced this news, the Leader of the Opposition ran out, almost excited, like he was happy that we were in this position. He started challenging reporters, when they were basically just asking him questions. A question that was asked by a reporter was whether he was overblowing this a little based on what the economists were saying. The Leader of the Opposition then asked what outlet they were with. Now the Conservatives are going to stand there and accuse us of employing the Donald Trump tactics. Members can look at what they are doing.

    Does the member not think that perhaps, just a little, the Conservatives are overplaying their hand with this, in the degree of excitement that they are showing for the circumstances that we are in right now?

    Madam Speaker, let me humble that out-of-touch, mega Liberal.

     After 11 years of this incompetent Liberal government, no one is giddy anymore. No one is excited anymore. No one has anything to smile about. The 2.2 million Canadians waiting in a food bank line are not giddy. The dad who just lost his job because of incompetent Liberal policies is not excited and is not giddy. The mom who has to put food back because she cannot afford it this week is not giddy.

    Conservatives are standing up for those Canadians because of bad Liberal policies that drove us into a recession, drove record numbers of people into the food bank and made more people food-insecure today than we have ever seen in this country before. That is what Conservatives are standing up for.

     Madam Speaker, what we always hear from these Liberals is that Canadians have never had it so good. Now that we have been talking about how Canada was on the wrong track and we are in a full-fledged recession because of these Liberal policies, they think this side is giddy. No, we are just disappointed.

    We have been bringing up stories about how everyday Canadians are finding it hard to make ends meet for years, and how taxes and the carbon tax are burdening mothers and fathers. Do members remember the consumer carbon tax? Well, the Liberals want all the credit for taking it away. They put it in there in the first place. They took thousands of dollars out of families' budgets every year, and now they want to think that Canadians are giddy that we are in a recession. No.

    It is such a difficult time right now for people around the country, and the Prime Minister is so out of touch. He will not answer a question about the recession. When he did talk about it, about three weeks ago, he said, on affordability, that Canadians have never had it so good.

    Could my colleague please respond to how out of touch the Prime Minister actually is?

    Madam Speaker, the member is absolutely right. At a time when the Prime Minister needs to present a plan to Canadians for plunging them into this Liberal recession, he is hiding. In fact, just yesterday, he did the whole Biden point, which is pointing to where he was going when asked a question and just walking that way. What he needs to do is present a plan.

    My colleagues started off by saying the Liberals copied our plan when we said to axe the carbon tax. That is where they started. Let us put some other solutions in front of them right now: cancel the industrial carbon tax; bring down the cost of food and everyday life; cancel all the antidevelopment laws that the Liberal government put in place that do not let a new pipeline, a new mine, a new dam or any infrastructure get built; cancel Bill C-69; get rid of the tanker ban, Bill C-48, and my colleague from Calgary has a bill currently in the House so we can get our product not just to the West Coast, but off the west coast into the Asian markets; and get rid of the industrial carbon tax so that we can make Canada more competitive.

     The world needs what Canada has. We just need the Liberal government to get out of the way.

    Madam Speaker, I am curious. The opposition has been talking a lot, understandably, as have we, about the importance of the development of the natural resource sector. The implementation agreement that we negotiated recently with the Government of Alberta is contingent upon some important factors that will ensure we find balance between that development and environmental protection.

    My colleague across the way talks about scrapping all of these policies that are contingent upon a pipeline being developed in partnership with the Premier of Alberta who supports it. Does he disagree with the Premier of Alberta in relation to that question?

    Madam Speaker, I think the only thing I can really agree with is when that member said that the Liberals have just talked about natural resources. We on this side of the House are all about action. Anywhere we go inside—

    I am going to resume debate with the hon. member for Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley.

    Madam Speaker, it is always an honour and a privilege to be able to rise on behalf of the great people of southwest and west central Saskatchewan. I rise today to talk about the opposition motion that we have put forward, but before I do, I just want to take a few moments here to offer our sincere condolences to the families in Pelican Narrows who were impacted by a shooting that happened up there yesterday. Our thoughts and prayers are with the community and the family of the victim up there. I wanted to start off by acknowledging that.

     What are we doing here today? We are talking about a recession. The Prime Minister himself, in an interview with the BBC when he was over in England, said “the technical definition of a technical recession is...two [straight] quarters of flat or negative [GDP] growth”. That is it. It is pretty simple.

     What do we have here in Canada? Let us take a look. Real GDP fell 0.1% in Q1, and the quarter before that, it fell roughly 1%. Based on the Prime Minister's own words, that meets the definition of a technical recession, so that is what we have.

    The Prime Minister has been in power for a little over a year. He is supposed to be the grandmaster economist who is going to save Canada. He was bold enough to stand at the microphones and say that the United States was on track for a recession, but Canada was not. There might be some impact from what is happening in the States, but it was headed for a recession, and we were not. That is what he said. That was right around the time of the last election, so that was one of the first things he was trying to sell to Canadians.

    Okay, so let us look at his track record. When he was over in England, he said that Brexit was going to cause a massive recession. Well, he was wrong. I just talked about what he said about the United States. He was wrong. He said Canada was not going to enter a recession. Guess what. He was wrong, because here we are right now. The Prime Minister's very own definition has been met: two straight quarters of negative or flat growth.

    An hon. member: Oh, oh!

    Jeremy Patzer: Madam Speaker, I am just quoting the Prime Minister. I know it is hard for the member to actually grasp his own leader's words, but that is what his own leader said. I am only quoting his own leader. If he does not like it, he can take it up with the Prime Minister.

    Let us talk a bit more about some of the signs and the markers we have been seeing when we talk to Canadians. We have been telling the government for a couple of years now that the pressures on households are getting to be very tight. What we saw in quarter one was that over 37,000 Canadians filed for insolvency, just in Q1. That is the highest it has been since 2009, when there was an actual global recession and the housing market crashed around the globe. It has not been that high since then. That is what we have been seeing.

    Let us look at household debt. Canadian household debt is 103% of GDP. Canadian non‑mortgage debt is $43,300, up from $40,200 two years ago, which was already a crazy high number. Now, when we look at the snapshot for just homeowners, non-mortgage debt is $82,400, up 19% in two years. Canadians are feeling the pressure and are putting more on their credit cards. It would appear that they are following what the government has been doing.

    What has the government done? The government has been living off the credit card that the taxpayers basically provide it. Every single announcement the government makes is borrowed money. The government has been running on constant deficits for a very long time. We saw a bit of a recent influx in government revenues because oil prices have gone a bit higher and the government actually benefited from that. What did the Liberals do? They spent it. They blew it. The deficit for this year alone is almost $80 billion.

    Let us take a look at what the national debt looks like. Canada is over $1.3 trillion in debt. That number is massively rising every single day.

    What is the Bank of Canada telling us? Well, there is 523 billion dollars' worth of debt that has to be refinanced. That was refinanced when the former prime minister said, “Interest rates are at [all‑time] lows, Glen”: 1%. It is now being recalled at 3%, so the share for every Canadian, just on that number alone, is going from $1,500 to $1,900 because of that jump from 1% to 3%. That is going to have a massive impact, and that is just in the short term. There is longer‑term interest that is going to be up for renewal as the years go on, and those rates are going to be higher and higher. We have a continually snowballing and cascading effect that is going to rock Canadian households.

    Let us take another look at what is happening in the business world. Business capital investment fell 0.7% in quarter one, which was the fifth straight quarter that business investment in Canada has fallen. This comes after a 10-year run with the Liberal government when foreign direct investment of over $1 trillion left Canada. For every dollar that came in, two dollars left. That is what we are seeing here. That is the by-product of what is happening today.

    When we look at some of the other statistics from the Bank of Canada and a few others, they mention that government spending was down 2.5% and that is what caused a bit of a drop in GDP. The fact that it is government spending that is also driving that shows the government is the one trying to artificially prop up the economy. The private sector is struggling. We are not seeing massive private sector investment. There are a couple projects here and there, but we are just not seeing the large-scale investment that is required.

    Let us look at what the Liberals wanted to do. Coming out of the election, they said they wanted to build at speeds not yet seen. What did they propose to the House? It was Bill C-5. They said they needed Bill C-5 because that was going to allow them to do what? It was to override their own bad laws they had put in place, because they recognized that was the problem. They said they needed Bill C-5 so they could circumvent their own laws that they had created. We said it would be better if they just scrapped the bad laws but that we would play ball and help them out, so we worked with the government to pass Bill C-5. We put some safeguards in there to make sure the Prime Minister was not greasing the palms of his buddies at Brookfield, and we helped them pass Bill C-5.

     Then they put projects on the list. There are a couple of LNG projects on there. They have been on that list now for well over 250 days. We are closing in on almost a year with some of these projects listed, and there has been no movement. Nothing is happening. Germany came here and said it wanted our LNG, and the government said, “Sure, this time we'll work with you to make sure you get some LNG.” When did it say we would deliver the LNG to Germany? It was sometime in the 2030s. There is no fixed date because the government does not actually know. What did Germany do? When the former prime minister said there was no business case, Germany went home and built an import terminal in 194 days. That is a shorter amount of time than the projects have been on the Major Projects Office list with nothing being done.

    What have Conservatives done? Well, we proposed the Canadian sovereignty act because we wanted to help the government get out of its own way. We proposed that in the same way we are doing here today, with an opposition day motion, to give the government a template to kind of get the ball rolling, to help it advance the football down the field, per se. The Liberals voted against it. They had an opportunity to implement another one of our great plans, and they voted no.

    They took our advice and scrapped the consumer carbon tax. Now they are saying this is one of the greatest cost-saving moves they have ever made, and that is because Conservatives were right. It was Conservatives who put the pressure on them to do it, and eventually they relented.

    Maybe if they would implement the Canadian sovereignty act, which would repeal the bad laws like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, that would get them on the right track and get them going, because Bill C-5 was supposed to be the mechanism to help them circumvent those laws. If they would implement the Canadian sovereignty act, it would get them going in the right direction. It would also get rid of the industrial carbon tax, which we know is putting massive downward pressure on investment in Canada because nowhere else around the world wants the same type of pricing mechanism that the government is going to enforce on Canadian industry. It is going to be devastating to Canadians.

    The Liberals should look at what Conservatives are proposing. We have had some great ideas that would help them and that probably would have helped them avoid entering this recession, which has been made by the Liberal government. If they want to work with us, we have great ideas. They have said no to many of them, and now they have to pay for that, which means Canadians have to pay for it because the government has no money. It is only because Canadians pay taxes and the government prints money against the future of Canadians that it acquires any money. At this point in time, if it wants to get the economy rolling, the government could take some of our great ideas that we have proposed, and that would actually help it avoid this recession.

    Madam Speaker, I want to ask one very specific question. What are the member's qualifications that determine his world economic view? I would like it if he could perhaps provide me with a list of studies that he has undertaken or degrees he has achieved. It is important that we take advice from folks who have a lot of knowledge, as our Prime Minister does, on world trading trends.

    We have often heard, for the last several months, about the Conservatives' plan. Can the member give me a copy of their plan today that they have been talking about for the last two months? I do not think they have a plan. It is a made-up plan with voodoo economics attached to it. Can he give me a copy of their economic plan today?

    Madam Speaker, that is a bit of a ridiculous question coming from that member, who spent 26 years in a provincial government and destroyed Saskatchewan. That is his track record: destroyed it.

    Again, he takes issue with what I said, but guess what. I was quoting the Prime Minister. If he takes issue with what I was saying, I was quoting the Prime Minister. He should talk to his boss if he does not like what I was saying, because that is who I got it from.

    If he wants to know what our plan is, he should just go back and look at the blues. We have it right on record. We debated it in this very House, and this member is saying he has never seen our plan. He needs to wake up and pay attention.

    Madam Speaker, the question we were just asked by the only Liberal in Saskatchewan was about the qualifications of a member of Parliament. Our qualifications are that we work hard, we get voted in by the people and we bring their voices to the House. My big problem with this member is that he represents northern Saskatchewan and has voted against every common-sense motion we have had. He voted to add taxes to streaming services. He voted to not scrap the industrial carbon tax. He voted to keep the gun confiscation plan in place. Everything his constituents sent him here to support, he has voted against.

    I would like some comments from my colleague on that.

    Do not forget the Snowbirds.

    Yes, Madam Speaker, let us not forget about the Snowbirds. When the Snowbirds were grounded, the Secretary of State for Rural Development said it was a very, very joyous and happy day. When the Snowbirds were cancelled, that is what he said.

    Yes, let us take a look at some of the benefits to Saskatchewan. The Secretary of State represents the part of our province that should benefit the most because there are a lot of great resources in the north that could be developed. The industrial carbon tax is going to hammer those projects in his riding, so it is shameful that he continues to prop up that policy. He is clearly not on Saskatchewan's side. Only Conservative members are truly on Saskatchewan's side.

    Madam Speaker, I would like to point out that the Conservative Party, both when it was in power and now that it is in the opposition, made several decisions that have been detrimental to Quebec's economy.

    Conservative Party MPs opposed including the Davie shipyard in the national shipbuilding strategy, even though Davie is the largest and most efficient shipyard in Canada.

    They opposed any government aid for Bombardier when the company was seeking cash to finance the C Series aircraft. In the end, the orders were lost to Airbus.

    They opposed Quebec companies, as in the case of the maritime patrol aircraft proposed by Bombardier...

    Furthermore, they are fiercely opposed to the energy transition.

    I want to know if the Conservatives are committed to being more supportive of Quebec's economy in the future.

    Madam Speaker, let us talk a little about some energy policy. It is important. I think the member would agree with me that it is actually up to the provinces to decide what path they are going to go on. I know Quebec has done a lot with hydroelectric, and it views hydrogen, for example, as a plan to go forward.

    In Saskatchewan, we have a lot of natural gas. There is a lot of oil extraction that goes on. That is a provincial resource. It is up to the provincial government to deal with that.

    The federal government, the Liberal government, has been taking a top-down approach that is forcing provinces to take one path or a different path but not the path that the provinces themselves actually want to choose. Resource extraction is up to the provinces and should be left to the provinces, and the feds should just get out of the way.

     Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to participate in today's debate and to set the record straight in response to the opposition's frequent attempts to talk down the Canadian economy, Canadian industries and Canadian workers.

    Before I launch into my speech, I want to take a moment to thank the member from northern Saskatchewan on this side of the House, who is, by far, the best representative for that province sitting in the House of Commons. He has advocated to ensure that Saskatchewan can supply uranium for the nuclear energy that India needs, and he has also advocated for our canola producers to ensure that we unlocked access to the Chinese market for them again. He has done an incredible job since he has joined the House, and members opposite should be ashamed for talking him down like they do the Canadian economy every single day. While the members opposite seem to wake up every morning hoping for bad news in this country, on this side of the House, we wake up every day and get to work for Canadians.

    We know that Canada did not create the tariff and trade disputes that have knocked the global economy off its moorings. On this side, we also know that Canada did not create the war in the Middle East. It seems obvious to say this in the House of Commons, but sometimes the obvious avoids the minds of the Conservatives for some reason.

    Energy prices have pushed higher as a result of the war in the Middle East, which are, again, beyond our control. Increased market volatility and geopolitical instability are fracturing supply chains and weighing on the global outlook across the world economy. Neither our economy nor any economy can escape the impact of these unfortunate developments.

    We cannot control everything that happens abroad, but we do control what we do here at home. That is exactly what we are focused on. We are focused on what we can control. Ascribing responsibility for the impact of world-shaking developments onto the government of Canada is like seeing a bride dance with her father and concluding that the two are getting married. In short, it involves ignoring the full range of facts relevant to the analysis, which the Conservatives always seem to leave out, and jumping to the wrong conclusions. That would be no way to run a country.

    The origins of the challenges being faced by Canadians and their government are beyond our borders. Countries around the world are being hit, and in some cases, they are being hit extremely hard. Let us take, for example, some things that we know. The Canadian economy is highly integrated with our southern neighbour's, making us even more susceptible to the impacts of the trade relationship that has often been one that we have relied upon. That is why the most trade-exposed industries, such as automotive, steel, aluminum, etc., are where the job losses are the most concentrated, but we also see half the sectors in our economy growing. Those that are less exposed to trade are expanding.

    Despite the challenges we see in the Canadian economy, with some of our industries being impacted by trade and tariffs and others growing at a time of crisis, the IMF still says that Canada has the strongest fiscal position in the G7 and expects Canada to record the second-strongest growth in the G7 this year and the following year. The IMF believes, as we do, that the Canadian economy remains resilient, with ongoing growth in household spending and business investment.

    We have seen consumer spending rise by 1.5% over the last quarter, and it is up nearly 2% year over year. We we have also seen business investment in new equipment, machinery and IP protection grow by over 10% this year, but Conservatives conveniently ignore this fact. It is a direct result of the productivity superdeductions and immediate expensing measures that we put in budget 2025, which are focused in those areas to help businesses make those capital investments at a time of global uncertainty. This may be bad news for the Conservatives, but it is good news for Canadians.

     The Conservatives like to paint a picture of doom and gloom because it suits their narrative, their social media clips and their fundraising emails. All of that seems to be the only thing they care about when they are speaking in the House. They ignore that our per capita GDP is rising. In quarter one, GDP per capita grew by almost 1% at 0.9%.

    The Conservatives stood up in the House, and I cannot remember, but it must have been for five years, talking about GDP per capita as being the core measure of the strength of our economy. They went on and on about it, and today they do not give a hoot about GDP per capita. It rose by almost 1%, and we do not hear Conservatives say anything about it, not one word, despite having advocated for GDP per capita to be the core measure of the strength of our economy for over five years in the House.

    They look past the fact that foreign direct investment is at a nearly two-decade high and is running at twice the rate of our nearest G7 peer. They also conveniently ignore the fact that credit arrears and insolvencies remain broadly in line with historical averages. We just did a study on this at the finance committee, where our government and the members on our side all supported the Conservative motion to study household debt. What we saw was that household debt is at historical averages after being at a pandemic low. What is really interesting about household debt in Canada is that Canadians have five times the wealth compared to the debt they have on average. They have five times the wealth. This is a significant stat that, obviously, the Conservatives would like to ignore, because it is not convenient for them to admit.

    They conveniently gloss over the fact that non-U.S. exports are on track to double over the next decade, up 36% with 20 new trade and security agreements having been signed in just over one year. Their petty partisan slogans conveniently ignore the fact that wages have outpaced inflation every month that the government has been in office. In fact, wages have outpaced inflation and have been double the rate of inflation in the most recent statistics.

    The Conservatives, again, have sat in the House for years and years. I am looking at two members who are relatively new, so they would not have an institutional memory of this, but Conservatives sat here and told us that wages needed to rise and that people needed stronger incomes and reduced taxes. This is exactly what the government has done. We have achieved wages growing higher than the pace of inflation every year that the government has been in the House. The Conservatives would rather ignore the fact that Canada now ranks as the most attractive country in the world for infrastructure investment. To top it off, Canada has added more jobs per capita than the United States has. In fact, we have added double the number of jobs the United States has.

    Let me also say that our biggest bank, our biggest pension plan, even the central bank governor, the governor of the Bank of Canada, have all come to the finance committee and said that Canada is attracting global investors at a rate they have never seen before. I know that is not convenient for the Conservative narrative that they love to perpetuate, which is that Canada is broken. They are simply choosing to ignore Canadian ingenuity, Canadian hard work, Canadian resilience and that grit of the Canadian people to grow, despite the challenges we face. It is not true. It is just not true. The truth needs to be spoken in the House.

    The resilience is rooted in the fact that our government has taken action to support Canadians through these challenges by building a stronger economy at home, protecting Canadian jobs and sectors, diversifying our trading relationships, making life more affordable for Canadians, attracting investment and boosting productivity.

     We know, for example, that as a result of the ongoing global instability, Canadians are facing challenges in managing the cost of living, and they are facing them right now. This means that, while our plan to build the strongest economy in the G7 takes effect, affordability pressures, especially those related to food and essentials, demand immediate support for Canadians, so that is why we are stepping up. The Canada groceries and essentials benefit, for example, will help Canadian families by building on the former GST credit. The amount is increasing by 25% for five years as of July. In addition to that, it will provide a one-time payment, to be issued this Friday, June 5, which is equivalent to a 50% increase in the 2025-26 annual value of the GST credit.

     Combined, this means that a family of four will receive up to $1,890 this year and about $1,400 a year for the next four years. A single person will receive up to $950 this year and about $700 a year for the next four years. That is literally making life more affordable for millions upon millions of Canadians. In fact, the new Canada groceries and essentials benefit will provide additional significant support for more than 12 million Canadians. That is a significant number.

    The Conservatives fail to recognize that we are stepping up to provide these supports. They would call the tax measures and programs that we offer “garbage”. They do not seem to want to help Canadians at all.

    While we are reining in government spending on operations, we are also investing in the Canadian economy and offering federal benefits, supports and tax measures to help Canadians. Not only are we putting more money in the pockets of those who need it most, but we are also leaving more money in their pockets with our middle-class tax cut. By lowering the first marginal personal income tax rate from 15% to 14%, since July 1, 2025, we are saving two-income families up to $840 this year.

    That measure is for 22 million Canadians. The first measure, as I mentioned, is for 12 million Canadians. This tax cut is for 22 million Canadians. That is over half the Canadian population. It is a significant number of people who are going to benefit from that income tax cut. This rate reduction is providing meaningful relief to middle-class Canadians during the current period of economic uncertainty.

    What is more, the bulk of the relief will go to the incomes in the two lowest tax brackets. This is a commitment that we have always had, one that I know the Conservatives do not share, which is to help the people who need it the most. That is a core Liberal value. It is a core value on this side of the House. I know the Conservatives have always just supported tax cuts for the rich, but at least we understand the challenges that Canadians face. We are stepping up to help the people who need it the most.

    We know that no one is more important to consider through the lens of economic security than our kids. I have three young girls at home, and I would bend the space-time continuum to ensure their health, safety and prosperity and to ensure that their lives are protected and that they live the fullest lives possible. I am sure every parent would say that about their kids. That is why we made the investment in a national school food program permanent, which Conservatives have, on the other side, called “garbage”. They have misinformed Canadians, despite the fact that I have seen the programs deliver food to schools and to kids in classrooms. I have actually participated in that program, and I have seen the good that the program does across my region and Durham region.

    Conservatives have said that there is no food in the food program. They have said that multiple times. They have tried to misinform people about feeding hungry children. They have actually voted against feeding over 400,000 more hungry children in the country, while standing up in the House every day and claiming that they are with the people, that they support families, that we need to do more to support people who are food insecure. What a crock. I have never heard a bigger crock of nonsense in my whole life than the Conservatives feigning and faking that they somehow care more than we do about Canadian families and kids who are in food bank lineups. We are the ones stepping up to support them with a billion dollars over five years, as well as having made that program permanent.

    That was an ask from Food Secure Canada and the Coalition for Healthy School Food, which has been around for decades. Our government is delivering the investments needed in that program to make sure kids are fed all across the country. I could not be prouder of that measure.

    On the home front, we are boosting housing supply across Canada through the improving housing supply act, which means that $1.7 billion would go to provinces and territories to remove barriers and accelerate homebuilding, such as through reducing development fees and levies on new home construction.

    To help Canadians buy their first home, we introduced the first-time homebuyers GST rebate. With this rebate, we have effectively eliminated GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes up to $1 million and reduced GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million. That tax cut for homebuyers will save Canadians up to $50,000, allowing more young people and families to enter the housing market and making the goal of home ownership a reality for more Canadians.

     In my home province of Ontario, the agreement that we signed with Ontario will effectively achieve a 13% reduction of the HST charged on a new home purchase. That is up to $130,000 off a $1-million home, and then with a 50% reduction in development charges, that is significant support. It is up to $200,000 in savings. One cannot argue with that. If we want to increase housing supply, deal with affordability in the housing market and help our young people, as Conservatives often say in this House they do, we have to support those measures. Those measures are making an impact. We have already seen and heard anecdotal evidence from our development industry.

     To further make life more affordable for Canadians, we are also reducing fuel prices and the pressure on Canadians at the pump by suspending the full amount of the federal fuel excise tax on gasoline, diesel fuel and aviation fuels until Labour Day, September 7, 2026. This is expected to reduce price pressure at the pump and lower Canadians' bills at the gas station, with an expected savings of up to $5.75 on gasoline when filling up a 50-litre tank of fuel. All told, it is estimated this will provide over $2.4 billion in total tax relief in 2026, intended, obviously, to continue to ease the pressure on families. This builds on one of the very first actions we took as a government, which was to lower costs at the pump in provinces and territories, having suspended the divisive consumer carbon tax.

     I could go on, but maybe I will just say that we have also supported Canadians with child care, dental care and the Canada child benefit. I know that families in my riding are saving a lot of money by having access to dental care and child care. The average family in my riding will pay about $1,800 per child per month for child care. After we introduced our program, those fees went down by 50%. They have gone down even further. Families are paying about $410 per month right now. Let us just think about how much savings that is on a monthly basis. Families are saving $1,400 a month in my riding of Whitby. That is significant support for families that have young children.

     We have also preserved all the federal benefits that Canadians rely on. We have cut taxes. We have not raised one single tax. We have saved over $60 billion, over the next five years, by finding savings within government operations. That is significant. I was at the OECD last week. I had the chance to present on a panel on public finances with Greece, Argentina, Portugal, the U.K. and Ireland, and I can say that our peers across the world look at Canada and envy the fiscal position and the responsibility we have shown in relation to stewarding public finances in this country. I know Conservatives do not believe that, and that is fine. They are often out of touch with reality, and we see more displays of that in this House every single day.

    These are just a few examples that I have covered in this speech of how we are bringing down costs for Canadians. The bottom line is that to support Canadians through the current global energy market disruptions, our government is delivering timely, tangible, fiscally sustainable and targeted relief for Canadians at a time when they need it, and we are doing so across a wide range of fronts.

    Today's motion, by failing to account for the most prominent causes of the economic pressures that Canadians are struggling with, presents an incomplete and therefore faulty analysis. The bride is not actually marrying her father, and Canada is not doing as poorly, in comparison to the rest of the world, as this motion would suggest. As the famous American philosopher and pragmatist William James rightly concluded, “Pessimism leads to weakness. Optimism leads to power.”

     We choose optimism and power. That is what building Canada strong means, and we urge this House to reject today's motion accordingly.

    

    Madam Speaker, notwithstanding the rhetoric in that speech and the pat on the back that the member is expecting, there is a disconnect between what he said and what we are seeing on the ground. As a matter of fact, in communities across the country today, Canadians are struggling to afford food to put on the table. Young people cannot find a job. Housing is completely out of reach for everyone.

    Does the member know that schools are not open at dinnertime? Food Banks Canada has reported that 2.2 million people are visiting food banks every month, one-third of whom are children. While the member wants a pat on the back, 24,000 children today are going to walk into a food bank, hoping to find something on the shelf to eat because they are hungry.

    What does he have to say to those hard-working Canadians, those families and those children who cannot afford to put food on the table today?

    Madam Speaker, we see that the Conservatives are always concentrated on the problem but have no solutions. As usual, they present only the challenges that the country is facing, without offering any solutions.

    Our government is actually creating good-paying jobs for Canadians all across this country. We are making record investments and generational investments in housing, defence, infrastructure and productivity. We have offered tax incentives, tax cuts and new federal benefits to help families with the cost of groceries. The groceries and essentials benefit that Canadians will receive this Friday is a good example of that.

    Why did the member vote against the national school food program if he is concerned with feeding families? I cannot understand where the Conservative Party actually stands on these issues.

    Madam Speaker, despite everything my colleague said, the fact remains that Canada has the highest level of household debt in the world, or one of the highest in the world, according to the IMF. The people most affected by that are those with the lowest earnings: seasonal workers who are struggling to get enough EI, given the rising cost of rent and groceries.

    I want to share the story of Lise Lapierre, whom I met at the E. Gagnon & Fils plant in Sainte‑Thérèse‑de‑Gaspé. Her EI ran out so she had no benefits coming in from early March to mid-April, so she evidently had no option but to go into debt.

    When will the government finally take action and put an end to the spring gap in EI?

    Madam Speaker, we actually just extended EI support for seasonal workers in the spring economic update. We have also done lots for tradespeople, for example. We have a trade mobility deduction that has been extended from $4,000 to $10,000, for those who are travelling to be part of building Canada strong and helping us build the infrastructure, housing and defence capabilities that this country needs. We are making announcements every single day about new investments that are going into those industries.

    The members opposite can laugh and they can mock, but there are 21,700 jobs at the new nuclear project at Darlington in my region. I have heard about displaced workers from our auto industries getting retrained and going to work in those construction jobs to build the small modular reactors.

    It is no joke to members on this side of the House that we are building a stronger economy. We are replacing those jobs that have been displaced based on a trade war that we did not start and we did not ask for. We are doing everything that is in our power to help support Canadians with jobs.

    Madam Speaker, I know that Conservatives really like AI, because it seems like half of their speeches and questions are written by AI. I am a bit more skeptical.

    However, while I was sitting here listening to the member speak, I took a picture of the motion and asked AI, “What do you think of this motion?” This is the response I got: “This motion is built for maximum rhetorical punch, not factual or analytical strength. The motion collapses complex economic indicators into a simplistic, worse-than-the-G7 narrative, cherry-picks metrics without context and demands an impossible remedy that has no coherent policy meaning.” I am sure the Conservatives will say that this is our woke Liberal AI.

    Can the parliamentary secretary provide his comments on whether he thinks AI got it right this time?

    Madam Speaker, I am going to have to clap for AI at this point. I certainly never suspected that it could do that quick of a job dispelling the illusions that the Conservatives are trying to purport and promote in the House with their motions, which they do every day in the House.

    However, let us just take what the experts have said, even if Conservatives do not believe in expertise anymore. The National Bank said:

    That is from the National Bank.

    I have quotes from RBC's Steven Gordon and many, many other professionals who analyze the economy and do not think that the Conservatives are accurate, so AI is right and the experts agree.

     Madam Speaker, I will bring it back to how the topic today actually impacts many Canadians. This is a very special subject, and it impacts so many Canadians. It is about opioids.

    The member was talking about the safety of children. Right now, we have a government that actually endorses fentanyl use and drug consumption sites next to kids here in Canada. Through an exemption, there are actually federally approved sites right now in Canada operating 50 steps away from schools and day cares. In these drug consumption sites, there is fentanyl used 50% of the time. The member has totally skewed what he means by safety for children.

    I cannot imagine the member's children being exposed to these drug sites every day going to school, so my question for him is, does he actually think it is safe to use fentanyl beside children?

    Madam Speaker, this is an example of the members opposite not even being able to stay on track with the motion they proposed in the House. Today we are debating a motion that creates all kinds of illusions about an economic reality that the Conservatives seem to have created, which they do every day in the House, to purport and disseminate narratives that are untrue, and the claims they are making in this motion are untrue. We have taken the time to provide information that dispels the many myths in the Conservative motion.

    In terms of children's safety and security, our government has advanced the most comprehensive set of legislative reforms in Canadian history to keep Canadians safe. I wonder why the Conservatives have stalled and obstructed many of those Criminal Code changes, many of those changes that have added tools to police services to ensure that our kids and communities are safe.

    Madam Speaker, the Conservatives may be exaggerating a bit, but the fact remains that Liberal policies have in fact contributed to the technical recession we are currently experiencing, although we cannot call it an economic crisis.

    For example, with their immigration policy that makes no sense whatsoever, they drove up the cost of housing. They also drove up the cost of public services. They do not want to compensate Quebec for that.

    What does my colleague think about that? What are they going to do for Quebec? The costs relating to asylum seekers are estimated at more than $700 million, and the Liberals are still refusing to pay Quebec for that.

     Madam Speaker, the member is being a bit more moderate in his assessment of the Conservative motion, which is obviously inaccurate, overstates and, in a way, exaggerates. It is nothing but hyperbole.

    In terms of his question, our government has taken a responsible approach to immigration levels. We have reduced those immigration numbers in almost every category, with the intention to ensure that we are not straining our health care and housing—

    We have to resume debate with the hon. member for Mirabel.

    Madam Speaker, I thank all of my colleagues for contributing to the debate on this important motion. I am not saying that everything in it is right, nor am I saying that everything in it is wrong, but it is an important motion.

    Before I begin, I want to say that we have concerns about the impact AI will have on our lives. Just today, in fact, I think we saw an example of how AI can insinuate itself into parliamentary debates. The government whip stood up and read us some AI text from a source that cannot be verified. There is no way to tell if it is true or false. Then there is the member for Whitby, with whom I get along very well. We do not agree on everything, but we have a good working relationship. He studied philosophy. He is a philosopher, yet he stood up in the people's assembly and, with a philosophically straight face, said that, if AI suits his partisan agenda, AI is right, and that is just the way it is.

    Personally, I believe we are capable of having healthier debates in the House, especially since this is a technical debate, a debate on numbers, and since we might end up having to meet somewhere in the middle. With respect to this motion, what will ultimately determine how we vote will probably be the accuracy of the facts cited. According to the motion, we are in a recession. We have had two consecutive quarters of negative growth. There was a significant contraction of 1% in the last quarter, followed by a quarter for which we have only preliminary data. We know the data will be revised, but for now there was a very slight decrease of one‑tenth of a per cent.

    First of all, I do not like the term “technical recession”. I was talking about this yesterday with the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, who says we are not in a recession. He is not saying that the economy is doing well. He is saying that we are not in a recession, as if that is some sort of award, as if he could skate off with the puck by saying that we are not in a recession and that that is their objective as a government. In an economy, the aim is not to avoid a recession; it is to achieve real growth that increases people's purchasing power and raises living standards. I do not like the term “technical recession”. Think about having pneumonia. Can someone have technical pneumonia, but not pneumonia? Can someone have a bout of the technical flu, but not the flu? That is not how it happens. Either we are in a recession or we do not know yet and we will find out later. There are symptoms. It is a bit like psychiatry, in that there are clinical criteria. Sometimes, not all of the criteria are met. Sometimes, no one is sure of the diagnosis and it gets figured out down the line. However, one thing is certain: Things are not going well.

    The Liberals are telling us that we are not in a recession. I would like to send a message to the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin. GDP data is constantly being revised. Right now, the growth is negative, but perhaps it will become positive when we look at future versions of the data. That is what the Liberals are telling us. They are saying to wait for the forthcoming data. However, when the data for the past few quarters was revised, positive quarters became negative. In the second quarter of 2025, the GDP dropped by 0.2%. The data for the fourth quarter of 2025 was also revised, but not in the government's favour. When the data is revised and things are worse than we thought, the Liberals should be taking some of the blame for that, but they are not.

    How do we know if we are in a recession? First, it is not up to Statistics Canada, the government or us to decide that. In the United States, the National Bureau of Economic Research is the one that decides whether the country is in a recession based on a set of criteria that is generally in keeping with two consecutive quarters of negative growth, but the criterion is not two consecutive quarters. In Canada, we have the Business Cycle Council at the C.D. Howe Institute that has its own criteria. To determine whether we are in a recession, we need to assess the extent of the variation in the GDP. In this case, Canada saw a contraction in the first quarter, but it was very small. We need to look at the duration. There can be a recession with just one quarter of contraction. If the economy were to plummet by 30%, then we would not have to wait for the next quarter to see that we are in trouble. It depends on the specific circumstances. It depends on the extent of the slowdown. We want to know how many industries are affected. We want to know whether there has been a significant impact on GDP across many industries.

    Are we in a recession or are we not? No one knows. Neither the Conservatives nor the Liberals can say for sure. This is an absolutely absurd debate.

    More than that, this debate is obscuring the fact that the economy is not doing well. It is appalling that we would spend a whole day wondering whether we meet criteria 1, 2, and 3, whether we will meet them in two months, or whether the first month of the second quarter is positive or negative. It is appalling because no one believes the Canadian economy is sustainable in its current state. I think this is a distraction from the real debate.

    However, it is reasonable to fear a recession because, while the unemployment rate is high, it has remained stable. The employment rate has held up relatively well, but it is fragile. That is true, and it is one of the criteria for a recession. As we can see from the GDP data, Canadian companies that are having trouble exporting have started to increase their inventory. What does that mean? It means that warehouses are filling up. They have not laid anyone off yet, but there are closures. There are significant impacts on businesses. However, some companies have decided to maintain shifts, not lay everyone off and build up their inventory. Warehouse space is finite. They cannot keep stockpiling goods indefinitely. What this tells us is that when it comes to exports, trade and negotiations with the United States, we are sitting on a ticking time bomb. The state of inventories is critical.

    For the same reason, the economy occasionally recovers after a recession, but without adding any jobs, because businesses start selling off the inventory that was sitting in their warehouses, without rehiring people. There may be early signs of a recession without any job losses because our businesses are resilient and do not want to lose their workforce straightaway by laying people off.

    We have talked about the importance of the wage subsidy in maintaining employment relationships for people who are being laid off. These days, if a company lays off its workers, someone else will poach their expertise. Of course, the Prime Minister has been telling us for a year now that the situation will soon be resolved. However, once the situation is resolved, the businesses will not be able to get their employees back.

    As I was saying, there are warning signs. I listened carefully to the member for Whitby. It is not always easy, but I did it. He broke down the GDP for us. He told us that investments are ongoing thanks to their superdeduction. In reality, the superdeduction is the chantilly cream of fiscal policy. It is not a superdeduction. Are members familiar with chantilly cream? It is whipped cream with a bit of sugar mixed in. The pretty name is just to make it seem more appealing. The same goes for the superdeduction. It is not a superdeduction. It is the same accelerated depreciation found everywhere, including in the United States. On top of that, they have picked the winners.

    Some companies are telling us that Canada has a digital sovereignty problem. They say that they want to get into fibre optics because the Minister of Finance forgot about fibre optics in these sectors, because he picked the winners. Now, the government is telling us that it is a superdeduction. It is not a superdeduction. It is accelerated depreciation. He talks about it like it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, an unprecedented novelty, as if accelerating depreciation were a generational change. It is taxation 101, and it shows that this language is just hype, just rhetoric.

    The minister's parliamentary secretary told us that investment has increased and that consumption has held steady. It is true that household consumption has held steady. That is because we are showing solidarity. The Prime Minister is doing something that is taught in a first-year university course. It is called stimulus measures. When people are struggling, cheques are sent out to support consumption. This adds to the government deficit and will have to be paid back at some point. It is working for now, but sending out cheques is not a recipe for success over the next 10 years. What we need is growth. Government spending is also helping to offset that. Procurement is starting up, but these government expenditures are not a recipe for growth.

     What is wrong with the GDP? Let us break down the GDP figures. I see the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin: He knows this, because he breaks down these figures. He is a bit like me: He loves this sort of thing. What is driving the weakness in GDP is exports. We are in the midst of an export crisis. If I may coin a term for educational purposes, it could almost be called an “export recession”. This highlights the importance of our relationship with our American neighbours, as well as the importance of improving that relationship, even though they are not always easy to deal with. We may be negotiating trade agreements with the White House, but we do business with companies across the United States that still value their relationship with us, and it is with those companies that we trade. We need to strengthen our relationship with them. This shows how important it is to launch these negotiations with the United States. Mexico has already started. Formal negotiations have begun.

    When the Prime Minister was elected, he told us he was the best negotiator in the history of humankind, that he needed to be elected, that he would perform miracles and that the negotiations would go smoothly. That is what he told us. Since then, we have observed that the things that win votes in Canada hurt our relationship with the U.S. Some very harsh remarks have been made. I do not like Donald Trump any more than anyone else does. I do not think that what he is doing is acceptable. However, it is clear that the Prime Minister himself chose to damage his relationship with with U.S. in order to win votes in Canada, and that comes with a high cost.

    We have a breakdown of the data. No matter which way we analyze it, the absence of a deal and the absence of negotiations are having a critical impact on Canada's economy and on exports. Funnily enough, the member for Whitby was explaining all the components of GDP earlier, but he skipped over the one that is in crisis, so let me give my colleagues the numbers. Last quarter, compared to the same quarter last year, exports fell by 4.1%. That is a 4% drop. That is huge, and that is the problem. Things are only getting worse. The negotiations are not starting. Are we in a recession today or not? That is not the question that matters. What matters is that the plane has crashed nose first and people are wondering if it has hit the ground yet or not. That is exactly what is happening in the House.

    Canada's real exports, after correcting for inflation, fell by 4.1% in the first quarter. The quarter before, they fell by 2.9%. The quarter before that, they fell by 2.3%. The quarter before that, they fell by 3.5%. All of these figures are in comparison with last year.

    Keep in mind that we always receive the statistics a little later and that the quarter has only just begun, but the figures I just cited essentially cover the Prime Minister's entire term in office. How do we define the Prime Minister's term? He took office in the midst of a tariff crisis, that is true. He did not create it, that is true. He could not negotiate everything in the first week, that is true. However, in every quarter of his term, we have neither an agreement nor any negotiations. Our relations are deteriorating, and things are falling apart. Nearly 80% of our exports go to the United States. I understand that the Prime Minister is out and about with his address book, travelling and striking trade deals, and that is fine. However, it is wrong to believe that we should completely set aside our relationship with the Americans. That would be economic suicide. That is literally what the Prime Minister is doing. That is what we are seeing with the 4.1% drop in exports. That is what we should be discussing today: that figure, and that figure alone.

    It is always difficult to talk about the economic situation in Parliament. However, let us be honest. When jobs are created, the government often claims that it has created them. Most of the time, that is not true. There are cyclical factors. There are international factors. Governments do not necessarily create jobs. Likewise, a recession is not always a government's fault.

    I will give the example of the Harper government in 2015. After Stephen Harper became prime minister, there was an energy crisis that led to a crash in oil prices. That was in no way the federal government's fault. Later on, Canada found itself in a recession. That was not Prime Minister Harper's fault. The job losses and decline in investment were the result of a situation that the government had to address. In that case, it was not the government's fault. Most of the time, that is how it is.

    However, in this case, the government is playing a special role. The government is describing the situation as though it is not responsible for it. The government is telling us—

    There is some noise. I will ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to go and check what is causing it, because it is very disruptive.

    The hon. member for Mirabel.

    Madam Speaker, the government keeps saying that it is trying to control what it can, but that there is very little that it actually can control. It is going to pay out benefits and put together a package of stimulus measures, as if this could go on forever. The government keeps saying that it is not to blame. However, in this case, the government messed up, because the Prime Minister was elected on the solemn promise that he would be better at negotiating with the Americans than anyone else on the planet. That was his promise. Today, exports are tanking. I see that as a serious problem.

    The Liberals are going to stand up. I know it. I see the MPs on the other side; we are starting to get to know them. They are going to tell us that per capita GDP is rising and that they have put an end to the per capita recession. However, when we told them, over the last two years, that per capita GDP was falling and that the average Canadian was becoming poorer, they told us we were anti-immigration racists, that it made no sense to speak out against immigrants, that they were the ones who would be looking after us in long‑term care. Now, all of a sudden, we are supposed to be talking about per capita measures. They can go back through the Hansard and see that I have been talking about per capita figures for a long time.

    What happened? The Liberals reduced immigration levels. They used to be under the thumb of the person who is now their ambassador in Washington, someone involved in the Century Initiative group. These people had decided that there would be 100 million Canadians by 2100 and that they had to get to work immediately, without co‑ordinating with the provinces to ensure that these people would have access to services, that immigration would be successful and that everything would run smoothly.

    I am in favour of immigration. I met the love of my life thanks to immigration. That is not the issue. We want integration, housing and so on, but the Liberals are cutting all that stuff. The population is declining, and they are proud of that. They say per capita GDP is growing. Economists are usually happy when GDP is growing because it indicates increased productivity, but in this case it is what we call a denominator effect. GDP is divided by the number of people. The Liberals are reducing the number of people, which means there is a chronic productivity issue, yet we are supposed to be impressed with them even though they attacked us relentlessly when we said the same thing three years ago.

    The same goes for housing. I do not necessarily agree with everything in the motion. I do not think that we will support it considering how it is worded. The government knows full well that it is not going to build 500,000 homes in three years. It knows full well that housing was under pressure. As the latest data show, in the greater Montreal area, for example, we have almost reached a break-even point, with a vacancy rate of around 3%. There is a connection. The important thing is not the identity of the people in the housing, it is the number of people compared to the number of housing units. The number of housing units has to increase in proportion to the number of people to avoid creating pressure.

    The Liberals will say that housing prices are dropping because of Build Canada Homes, something that no one has figured out yet. We do not understand how it works. The Crown corporation signs agreements and makes announcements, but no housing has been built. The Liberals will boast that their policies are working. We have been telling them this for years.

    Earlier, the member for Whitby told the Conservatives that they never suggest anything and that all they do is complain. We have been proposing ideas for successful and well‑thought‑out immigration for years and we were called racists. Today, they are going to say that all we do is complain, and yet the Prime Minister is incapable of negotiating a trade agreement, the Saint‑Michel sawmill in Saint‑Michel‑des‑Saints is about to close and our furniture industry is in crisis. The Liberals will tell us that exports to Europe have increased. Indeed, aluminum smelters are sending aluminum to Europe that they are not selling to the United States, and that is what is inflating the data. That is exactly what is happening. No, we are not getting any results.

    The Liberals laugh at our proposals, but when we ask them to create a wage subsidy to free up the employment insurance system—whose actuarial structure cannot withstand two crises within seven years, including COVID-19—they should listen to us. When we tell them to reform employment insurance as well, they boast about having implemented yet more temporary measures. People are living in uncertainty. When we have had pilot projects for 15 years, perhaps it is time to assess whether they have worked and to move toward reform. Launching one pilot project after another is not policy. It is improvisation.

    We are also asking that the government purchase a portion of the countervailing duties paid to the United States on behalf of the forestry industry. This would be an asset for the government that would provide liquidity to players in the forestry sector, enabling them to maintain their operations and deal with the unjust situation the Americans created. What am I doing? Is this just whining?

    We are asking them to ensure that health care funding increases keep pace with the 6% rise in system costs. It is 5% this year and will drop to 3%. What is this? Is this just whining? Are they telling us that rebuilding a hospital creates fewer jobs than a military base?

    To kick-start the economy, some choices need to be made.

    The government pulls out its numbers, they break down the GDP and they tell us that everything is fine. They say that they are doing everything right and that it is not their fault when things are going badly. However, when things go well, they say it is because of the policies they implemented four or five months ago. I call on all government members to show a little more humility, because we have a long way to go in this matter.

    Madam Speaker, my colleague from Mirabel's passion is exceeded only by his knowledge on this subject.

    I understand the member's point about measuring and calling a recession, but we have to set numbers somewhere. The fact is that Canada's economy has contracted for three of the last four quarters. Not a single country in the G7 has had a contraction in the economy in the last four quarters.

    The government, we hear constantly, is blaming it on the trade war with the U.S. Mexico, which is more reliant by a fair amount on trade with the U.S. than Canada is, has actually seen its exports to the U.S. rise. Mexico, which is, again, more reliant on the U.S., has not fallen into a recession or a contraction in its economy, unlike Canada.

     I wonder if my colleague could expand a bit on his talk about how the government needs to stop blaming the U.S. for political gain and start working to improve the economy and exports, much like Mexico has.

    Madam Speaker, we sometimes get asked what the Bloc Québécois would do if we were in charge of the negotiations instead of the Prime Minister. Personally, I cannot promise miracles. We have always said that we would support the Prime Minister once he has a clear and intelligent strategy that he shares with us. After more than a year, that still has not happened.

    I have the figures for the last five quarters. In the first quarter of 2025, there was 0.7% growth; that does not get us very far. There was a decline in the second quarter of last year, followed by a slight upturn in the third and a decline in the fourth. That means we are arguing over whether we have 0% growth or a 0.1% decline. Things are not looking good.

    The problem is exports. When the companies that are showing a bit of resilience are no longer able to keep stockpiling inventory, there is going to be a problem. These figures do not take into account the new tariff calculations announced in April. The effect of that announcement is going to be felt gradually. Quebec is being hit the hardest. This new calculation is not yet included in these statistics. It is essentially a new calculation for tariffs on steel, aluminum and a few other goods. On the other side of the House, those who think that everything is fine, those who think that we have come through this and that we are more resilient, they need to bring their rhetoric into line with reality, regardless of how today's Conservative motion is worded.

    Madam Speaker, we could have said a lot of things, but we are short on time. I will just say two things.

    First, when we break down GDP, we should note that one of the sources of weakness in the first quarter was government spending. We know this is temporary. It is an adjustment, and it will change. However, I agree with my colleague that one of the main issues is exports. Indeed, exports to the United States are a significant problem, and it will need to be addressed over time.

    I would like to know what my colleague thinks about private investment, especially in a climate of uncertainty. After all, the decline in exports and the trade war are also creating a great deal of uncertainty. Another trend we are seeing is a freeze on private investment, particularly in machinery, equipment, and so on.

    What does my colleague have to say about that?

    Madam Speaker, I would like to say two things.

    My colleague, who knows I hold him in high regard, thinks that we do not have enough time for debate. I suggest that he go and talk to cabinet and tell them to stop imposing gag orders because we are not short on time in the House. They are the ones who do not want to debate. They have a caucus meeting tomorrow morning. I think that the member should strongly argue his point. If I could support him, I would, but I have no intention of crossing the floor.

    When it comes to private investment, we have issues with stagnation, competitiveness and productivity. It is true that there are issues that need to be addressed. However, while private investment is factored into GDP today, it is one of the main drivers of future growth. It is true that certain factors remain constant. It is true that the Prime Minister is doing what is taught in a first-year economics course. He is saying that the economy is not doing well so we are going to spend and do what we always do in a crisis. That is undeniably Canadian and that is what is taught in school.

    However, exports are a key issue. We cannot allow our exports to keep falling by 2%, 3% or 4% year after year, quarter after quarter. This decline in our exports is not slowing down. It is getting worse and we have not yet seen the full impact of the tariffs announced in April.

    In my opinion, that is the only thing that we should be talking about today, nothing else.

    Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague said that exports are down in Canada. Everyone is aware that the effects of the U.S. tariffs are very likely having an impact on exports to the U.S. However, the Prime Minister promised a new policy, namely that we would move away from the U.S. and develop partnerships around the world, which would compensate for the challenges associated with the U.S.

    Does my colleague think that the data show that this strategy is working?

    Madam Speaker, no government in Canada has ever argued that diversification is a bad thing. I believe it was Stephen Harper who signed our free trade agreement with South Korea, was it not? I would have to check. I think it was. Governments have signed free trade agreements.

    Government members go around saying that Canada is protected, that it has the most bilateral agreements with G7 nations. Of course, the government has always sought to diversify trade. However, we have to consider the reality of our geography and interdependence with certain industries. Canada's automotive industry cannot exist without the U.S. market, which is close by. We need to do both.

    The Prime Minister is pitting the two against each other. He is turning the diversification strategy into rhetoric which, in my view, is damaging our trade relationship with the United States. That relationship will one day be restored. This situation is getting to the point where the human impact—the impact on families and jobs—is very real. The government cannot spend its time simply sending out cheques in an economy where exports are declining, especially for Canada, which is a small open economy dependent on its exports, regardless of where it exports to.

    Madam Speaker, my question concerns the Bloc Québécois's economic approach. It is clear that the Liberals, the former Conservatives and the current Conservative Party all think alike when it comes to the economy. It is always about economic growth, but without regard for the well-being of everyone.

    What do my colleague from Mirabel and the Bloc Québécois think of the circular economy or Kate Raworth's book Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist? Could my colleague explain what the Bloc Québécois's approach to envisioning a different economy entails?

    Madam Speaker, there is growth, wealth, income and the way they are distributed.

    The Bloc Québécois's approach is quite simple. We note that fiscal capacity and room to manoeuvre are concentrated in Ottawa. Education, child care, health care, social services and municipalities—which are facing a homelessness crisis—fall under provincial jurisdiction or are directly provincial responsibilities. If we want a more just, more inclusive society with greater social mobility, transfers need to increase, and Ottawa needs to stop trying to create a social safety net managed by Cúram, that is not even capable of issuing cheques. That is our view.

    As for the circular economy, we need an economy that is more environmentally friendly and generates less waste. We need an economy that takes all these issues into account. Twenty or 30 years ago, we were filling landfills. Today, we realize that what we threw away were resources that can be recovered and given value, provided we create a market for them. In my opinion, that is an approach for the future.

    Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned a situation earlier and wondered whether it was the Harper government that established free trade with South Korea. The answer is a categorical yes. Members may recall that, under the visionary leadership of Ed Fast, the then minister of international trade, Canada, under Mr. Harper, had free trade agreements with 40 or so nations. Plus, back in 1988, when free trade with the United States was being debated, we received the support of Quebeckers, especially prominent Quebeckers like Bernard Landry and Jacques Parizeau, who spoke out in favour of free trade.

    I would appreciate it if the member could explain why free trade is important for Canada and especially for Quebec.

    Madam Speaker, free trade allows us to specialize in the things we do best. It is not a contest to see who is the best and who is not. What I was trying to illustrate is that diversification has always been a constant battle for successive federal governments. The miracle that this Prime Minister is promising is decades in the making. The thing he is promising to deliver within three years in order to win votes is not going to happen within three years. It is something that happens gradually. I think he needs to work on improving his relationship with our neighbours to the south.

    Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in today's debate on Canada's economic future, particularly with regard to the reality facing all Canadians as we speak, because yes, sadly, Canada is in a recession. It is with great joy and pleasure that I will share my time with my distinguished colleague from Calgary Crowfoot, and I thank all those who are vigilant, unlike myself, who have unfortunately dropped the ball. In that regard, I will have a few words to say about people who have dropped the ball.

    We are not happy to note that Canada is in a recession. As all economists know, a country is in a recession when its gross domestic product, or GDP, is negative for two consecutive quarters. Some may seek to qualify this particular recession, but, mathematically speaking and quite clearly, it is defined as follows: If the GDP is down for two consecutive quarters, it is a recession, and that is what we are dealing with.

    Some have tried to quibble over this definition of a recession. However, beyond the quibbling, there is the reality of the hardships faced by Canadians—hardships that have plagued Canada for far too long. We have the worst food inflation among G7 countries. Every month, 2.2 million Canadians turn to food banks for food. Let us not forget that we are in Canada. Of that number, one-third are children. Families, fathers and mothers, cannot afford to provide for themselves and must resort to visiting food banks.

    I want to mention some folks in my riding, including people at Amélie et Frédérick and community fridges in Val‑Bélair, L'Ancienne‑Lorette and Loretteville on Racine. These people are working hard to provide food aid, and God knows their work is essential. We are fortunate that these volunteers with various charities in every riding, especially my riding, Louis‑Saint‑Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, are thinking of the least fortunate. The thing is, these folks are telling me that the people who donated to food banks for years are now the ones coming to food banks so they can feed their families properly.

    Unfortunately, Canada also has the second-highest unemployment rate among G7 countries. That is the reality in Canada. Those are the problems Canadians are facing. This confirms the sad reality that Canada is in a recession: those 112,000 jobs that were lost since the beginning of the year. There is the reality faced by entrepreneurs who want to invest but are dealing with serious concerns about economic stability. They cannot invest in an environment that is not stable, and the Canadian economy is currently losing momentum. We can also see the impact in trade flows. Some $20 billion in investment has left Canada, on top of the $1 trillion in investment that has not been made in Canada over the past 10 years under Justin Trudeau and the current Prime Minister. That is why we feel that the Canadian economy is weakening, that it is declining and that it is in recession.

    It is also important to understand that, over the last 10 years, Liberal governance has, unfortunately, not changed much. Take a look at what happened between 2015 and 2025, and from 2025 until today. Unfortunately, we are still on the same track. The government spends without restraint, it shows no concern for properly managing the money of Canadians who pay GST every day and their taxes every month, when our primary responsibility, as parliamentarians, is to ensure that the money is spent wisely. We have been living beyond our means for nearly 11 years. The debt has risen by $1 trillion, which is almost twice the total debt accumulated over the previous 125 years. That is the reality of Liberal management: $1 trillion in additional debt.

    Last week, I had an exchange with the Minister of Finance during committee of the whole. I reminded him that he is the third-most senior minister in the government, since the Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, Intergovernmental Affairs and One Canadian Economy and the Minister of Industry were both appointed ministers as soon as Mr. Trudeau was elected. Six months later, the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, the current Minister of Finance, was appointed.

    Today, as Minister of Finance, he is responsible for debts totalling $1 trillion, because that $1 trillion in debt has accumulated over the past 10 years. That is money we do not have. That is money that had to be printed. That is debt we are passing on to our children, our grandchildren, and our great-grandchildren, who have not yet been born but who will have to pay for it. That is why we must be careful. That is why we need a positive, winning strategy for Canadians.

    Our Conservative approach is basically to leave more money in the pockets of Canadians. Two months ago, we started a debate about transportation and gas taxes. That affects all Canadians, not just those who have a gas-powered car. We know that the goods we buy, like food, do not fall from the sky. These goods are transported, and, in many cases, gas is involved. This gas tax affects all Canadians.

    Our proposal was very clear: Abolish all federal taxes for the entire year. That would leave $5 billion more in the pockets of Canadians. We believe that people are better at managing their money than the government, to whom they send their money in the form of taxes.

    The government used our idea to fuel theirs, no pun intended. They decided to temporarily cut the excise tax by 10¢ for a few months. To paraphrase Neil Armstrong's words in reverse, cutting the tax may be a giant leap for the Liberals, but it is a small step for taxpayers. That is why we need to go much further.

    Our approach is to abolish all federal taxes. That would leave $5 billion more in the pockets of Canadians. That is how we can help people.

    We also wanted to unlock the full potential of Canada's natural resources. I have had plenty of opportunities to discuss this in my time here and on prior occasions when I was in the National Assembly. I am an ardent fan and strongly in favour of all the natural resources we have and all energy sources. When I talk about energy, I mean green energy, renewable energy and so-called fossil fuels.

    Canada has it all. Canada has every energy source that countries would go to war over. Canada has all the natural resources it needs to achieve its own and the planet's full potential. Canada is ready to go. Unfortunately, the government spent a decade holding back the development that Canada needs, that Canadians need and that the whole world needs. The whole world needs more energy. It needs the natural resources and rare materials that Canada has. The way I see it, there is no such thing as going too far with any of this.

    Furthermore, we must continue to open the door to free trade with countries around the world. As I mentioned a few moments ago, that has been the case in Canada since Brian Mulroney's terms in office, since the 1988 free trade agreement and since Jean Chrétien's efforts to extend that North American agreement. I am also proud to add that, under Stephen Harper, we truly broke down barriers by concluding agreements with nearly 40 countries, and that is a good thing. I am very pleased to see that the current government is following in those footsteps.

    We must continue in this direction, while recognizing that Canada is a champion of free trade. If free trade creates real wealth for Canadians, then it should go hand in hand with lower taxes and lower taxation. If we are capable of that, if we are a global model for free trade, then we should also practise free trade within our own country.

    I therefore urge the government to go further. That is why, unfortunately, Canada is in a recession. Canada deserves better.

     Madam Speaker, my concern is that the Conservatives tend to want to jump up and proclaim that Canada is in a recession, such as they did on Friday. Even the Bank of Canada has cautioned the Conservatives and others. Saying Canada is in a recession is premature at best. The Conservatives know that, yet they seem to want to glorify the word in order to plant fear in the minds of Canadians.

    The member put many comments on the record just now. He talked about trade and the importance of trade. We have had 20-plus trade and defence-related agreements in the last year under this new Prime Minister, who was elected just one year ago. He talked about energy. This Prime Minister has talked about making Canada a super energy supplier going into the future. Take a look at the major projects.

    I wonder if the member would—

    The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk.

     Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the comments by my colleague from Winnipeg North, even if they are wrong.

     The problem is, where are the results? People are asking for real results.

     I am sure the member remembers well the campaign promise by the leader of the Liberal Party 15 months ago. He said it would be elbows up and he told America we would be strong again. When he got elected, he went to the White House. What did he do? It was far from elbows up. He was humble.

     What did he do a week ago? He went to New York. What did he say? He said we will make America great again. Who can believe it? This is the truth. This is the reality.

     Imagine if a Conservative had said that in New York. Those guys would have been in a nuclear war against us.

     The truth is that this country needs real effects and real results—

    Questions and comments.

    The hon. member for Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj.

    Mr. Speaker, my colleague wanted to talk about natural resources in particular. One economic sector in serious difficulty in Quebec is the forestry industry.

    In the Gaspé, where I come from, forestry businesses are often family-owned. Those that export their products have been hit with 45% countervailing duties since October. One business operating in my riding is struggling financially. I am talking about Damabois, which has plants in Cap‑Chat and Matane. Two hundred jobs across Quebec could be at risk. Clearly, the government is not doing enough to support the forestry industry.

    Does my colleague agree with me that the government should do more to support Quebec forestry companies?

    Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for standing up for the businesses in his riding and in his part of the country. He does a good job of representing those people, unlike what we have seen over the past 10 years.

    I want to point out that we think that all natural resources should be developed properly. The best way for the government to help businesses is to find markets for them, support them in their search for new markets and reduce the related tax burden. Giving out hundreds of thousands of dollars and subsidies is not going to help. Instead, the government needs to help businesses develop markets and ensure that they have more money in their coffers so that they can invest in the future with the help and support of governments. The government needs to give them more room to act by opening up markets.

    Canada has representatives around the world, so lumber from the Gaspé region could be sold around the world.

    Mr. Speaker, when we listen to the Liberal government, we get the same message: Canadians have never had it so good. We have 2.2 million Canadians going to food banks every month. We have out-of-control crime. We have the only shrinking economy in the G7. We have the only shrinking economy among Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. About one-quarter of Canadians are living with food insecurity right now under the Liberal government.

     Does the member think Canadians have never had it so good, as the Liberals are claiming?

    Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his hard work, which I appreciate. I have known him for the last 10 years. He works hard for Canadians and the people in his riding.

    Let me be clear about this. Unfortunately, for all of the promises made by the Liberals, especially the Prime Minister we have right now who, in campaigns from coast to coast a year ago, said his way was the right way, it would be elbows up and we would be very strong because he knew about the banking system, there have been no results yet.

    Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to speak to opposition motions. Today Conservatives call on the House to recognize that the Liberal Prime Minister has given Canada the only recession in the G7. It is so sad that it has come to this and that we have to call on the House to recognize the sad fact that Canada is in a recession and is the only country in the G7 for which that is the case.

    Why is Canada alone in the G7? The government has blamed international events and continues to blame international factors for Canada's poor economic performance, but I point out to the House that every other G7 country faces the same international factors. The Liberals cite war in Ukraine, in the Persian Gulf and in Iran, but this affects all countries. They talk about the trade war that we certainly do not want and did not ask for in Canada, but I point out that the United States is tariffing itself. It faces tariffs. It has made the decision to make its own citizens pay tariffs on what it imports, yet it is not in a recession. It is Canada alone among G7 countries that is in a recession, so we have to look at other factors driving this.

    The Conservative motion calls on the government to recognize that Canada has the worst household debt in the G7. There was devastating testimony at the finance committee about a month ago. Equifax and TransUnion, two of the businesses that track consumer debt behaviour, informed the committee that indebted Canadians are getting deeper in debt. They are going further into debt, and the credit balloon is continuing to expand but not with additional players.

    It is not that Canadians are buying homes for the first time, or this kind of thing, and becoming new participants in credit. No, indebted Canadians are getting deeper in debt. They are coping with this not with higher salaries and higher incomes to pay their debts. They are stretching out their payments, refinancing their loans, skipping out on essentials, cutting back on other expenses and exhausting their savings. This is not sustainable. This is not going to give us a consumer-led recovery, because consumers are tapped out.

    In fact, Food Banks Canada just released a report that says that among lower-income Canadians, food, other essentials and housing combined are more than 100% of the average household budget. People at the lowest levels are the people getting deeper in debt. They cannot afford food. They cannot afford gasoline. They cannot afford housing. They are coping with it by exhausting any savings they might have and getting deeper into debt.

    Affordability is part of the crisis that we find ourselves in. With respect to housing, we call upon the government, in the motion, to acknowledge that we have the worst housing affordability in the G7. A first-time homebuyer, a young person or young family hoping to establish a new household and buy a home as part of a long-term financial plan or as a way to put down roots in a community, has not have a hope under the government.

    The Liberals have presided over the astonishing run-up in the cost of housing that has shut out a generation of young Canadians from home ownership and traps people in rents that they are increasingly unable to afford. Rent has more than doubled under the Liberal government. Even though rents have been coming down for the last 18 months, as it has pointed out, they are still more than double what they were when the government took office.

     We see housing as unaffordable. The Liberals have killed the dream of home ownership for a generation of Canadians. They have created a country in which one's ability to become a homeowner is really tied up in the question of whether or not their parents were homeowners and are able to share their equity with their children by refinancing their own home, lending them the money, co-signing, or all the different things.

    I was in the mortgage industry, and for the entire length of my career, a normal person with a normal, proper job who wanted to buy a home could save up the down payment over a period of a year or two and could come in, qualify for a mortgage and buy a home. That is simply impossible now in almost all of Canada's major cities. It is a real shame. We heard testimony to that effect at the finance committee.

    Our motion calls upon the government to present a plan to reverse the situation we are in. The Liberal government squandered the opportunity it had when it was first elected. Let us go back in time for a minute to 2015. In 2015, when the government was sworn in, it had a balanced budget and a conditionally approved pipeline to the west coast. Literally days after the government was sworn in, it cancelled the northern gateway pipeline.

    If that pipeline had been built, it would right now be pumping 525,000 barrels a day to world markets. Let us think of the economic activity just from that one project alone. At today's prices, that is nearly $50 million a day. Let us think of the tax revenue foregone by the government. Let us think of the paycheques that do not exist from all the jobs that would go into the production and transmission of 525,000 barrels a day at today's prices.

    The Liberal government blew it, and that was just one pipeline. There was also not yet an application, but there was an intent to build an east coast pipeline as well, and the government chased off that project when it started musing about changing, even before it put in Bill C-69, which really nailed the door shut and made sure no pipelines would ever get produced. What the Liberal government has done is it squandered the opportunity.

     There were years when there was a strong world economy in the early years of the Liberal government, and the Liberals blew it. They still ran up deficits. They spent the cupboard bare in times of relative prosperity globally. Ever since then, they have been less able to cope with crises and have left us where we are today, extraordinarily in debt with a $67-billion deficit that the government just tabled and fiscal anchors that have been just cut loose. They announce one and then they abandon it.

    The Liberals have presided over a productivity crisis that, two full years ago, the senior deputy governor of the Bank of Canada said was a break-glass emergency. Well, the Liberals did not break the glass and deal with the emergency. They have just fumbled along right up to this very day.

    The Prime Minister told everybody, about 15 months ago, that he was the man for a crisis and that he was the person who would have a deal with Trump's America by July 2025. The Prime Minister said that this was the time for prudent fiscal management and that as a banker he had the skills to manage the national budget. He said that he was a man for a crisis. It was all an illusion. Here we are now at a time when we are in a recession. We are the most indebted country in the G7. We have food bank usage that is off the chart. We have housing that is staggeringly unaffordable.

     We have the same global concerns as every other country, but we are the one that is in a recession. The responsibility for that lies on the Prime Minister, and the 10 and a half years of financial and economic mismanagement that has occurred under the Prime Minister and the government's watch.

     Mr. Speaker, the member needs a reality check.

    Just over a year ago, Canada went to the polls and elected a new Prime Minister with impeccable credentials. Rents have actually gone down since he became the Prime Minister. The average household net worth has increased since the new Prime Minister came to office. Since then, we have had a AAA credit rating and the best financial position in the G7. There are so many things taking place, such as the major projects and a budget that delivers in many different ways to Canadians, yet the Conservatives consistently go around spreading misinformation to try to make it look as if Canada is broken, which is not true.

    Mr. Speaker, there we have it again: another Liberal saying that Canadians have never had it so good. I really wonder whom the member talks to.

     The member raised the issue of the net worth of Canadians. I wonder if he has bothered to determine just how that average number might work out. Is it that there is an extraordinarily small number of people who have seen their assets inflate in value while the typical Canadian household is deeply in debt, getting deeper in debt and exhausting its savings just to keep up with bills?

    Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke about how the Conservatives want to eliminate all the fuel taxes. That would cost the government at least $5 billion.

    Would my colleague support scrapping all of the oil subsidies so that the government can recoup that money?

     Mr. Speaker, if the member meant that we have called upon the federal government to eliminate all the federal taxes on fuel, he is correct that we have called upon it to do so. We are disappointed that the government has not done it.

     As for subsidies, we are the party of free enterprise, and if the government would simply eliminate all the regulations and laws it has passed since 2015 that prevent projects from being built, we would be much better off today. I spoke about a couple of specifics on that in my speech, but it is on the government and its red tape that is holding Canada and our industries back.

    Mr. Speaker, 12 years ago, the front page of The New York Times declared Canada as having the richest, most prosperous middle class in the world. Eleven years after the Liberals took office, as my colleague mentioned in his speech, there is record household debt and delinquency, and the middle class is suffering. How is this possible in a country that is so blessed with the resources that Canada has?

     Mr. Speaker, it is possible because there was a change of government in 2015, and the new government blew it. It really is that simple.

     I mentioned some of the other advantages, from a government point of view, that the Liberals inherited from the previous government, in fact from previous governments. There was a decades-long running consensus around fiscal discipline in the House, and the Liberals blew it. They inherited, yes, what The New York Times described as the world's most prosperous middle class. This was a country where people could get ahead if they just did the work. A normal person could go to school, get a job, save a bit of money, buy a house, put down roots and start a family in a nice, safe neighbourhood. That is the country the Liberals inherited, and they blew it.

    Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

    I would like to begin where this motion does not. I will not begin with the numbers, but with the people this motion is supposed to be about. Somewhere, today, there is a parent at a kitchen table, running the math on a mortgage renewal for a second time because the first answer could not possibly be right. There is a young person in the same house who did everything they were asked to and is now looking at the cost of a home and wondering whether this country still has room for them. I am not going to tell either of them that these things are better than they feel. They are actually not, and we all know that. That worry is real, and it deserves a serious response, which is exactly what this motion is not, so this is where I part ways with the member who put this motion forward.

    The Conservative Party offers that family a story that all of this is the fault of one or two people, conjured in a single year, and that the cure, which the member just spoke about, is to simply tear things down. It is a tidy story. It asks nothing hard of the party that is telling it. It is a bid for power and a social media clip dressed up as an answer, but it is wrong. It is wrong about how we got here, and it is emptiest precisely where it ought to be the fullest, which is on what they would actually do instead. The members opposite are just about everything they are not and have no ideas about what we should be doing.

    Let us give that family an honest answer. The pressure did not arrive all at once. It built slowly over decades, through what successive governments of all stripes and at all levels chose to do and, far more often, chose to put off. There were too few homes built year after year, infrastructure was deferred and deferred again and productivity was left adrift while other countries pulled ahead. The one I know best is that, for decades, we let it become too hard to build big things in this country. Governments left the walls standing between our provinces so that it stayed easier to trade with another country than to trade with one another.

     None of it was inevitable. It was the accumulated cost of choosing not to act. The bill for everything that was waiting came up at the very moment the global economy was being torn up and rewritten. There are tariffs at levels not seen in generations and supply chains are fracturing under conflict in Europe and the Middle East. The Prime Minister has called this what it is: a rupture, not a transition.

    I did not come to this chamber as a political staffer. I did not grow up in politics. I came from building companies and creating actual jobs. I know what it takes to start something, to make payroll and to scale a business past the point that it is fragile.

     I know the patterns the members opposite never name. In this country, we generate world‑class research. We build competitive firms and then, sometimes, we watch the industrial scale, the intellectual property, the jobs and the talent migrate somewhere else. This pattern is not a law of nature, but a result of choices. This is a government that has finally made the other choice. It has chosen to back our champions, keep our IP here, keep jobs here, build talent here and let Canadian companies scale without having to leave Canada to do it ever again.

    We have made it easier to build big things again with the Major Projects Office so that nation-building projects stop dying in the queue. Ground has already broken on projects, like the port expansion in Montreal, which will move Canadian goods to the world for decades, and there are four major projects in my own province of British Columbia. The One Canadian Economy Act tears down the internal trade walls I just described. We have a productivity superdeduction so that businesses can write off investment right away and have a reason to make it here. We have a plan to unlock $1 trillion in investment over the next five years. We have $6 billion and 100,000 new skilled trades workers through team Canada strong so that we have the hands to build what we approve. We have Build Canada Homes, which is not another task force, but an actual builder with more than 7,500 homes already under way in this country.

    Here is how I know it is working. It is showing up in my own province. Anglo Teck is choosing Canada as its headquarters, bringing blue- and white-collar jobs to British Columbia. Torys is opening up a new office in Vancouver. Lululemon is keeping its headquarters in British Columbia. These are companies that could plant their flag anywhere on earth, and they are choosing here because they see what British Columbia and Canada have to offer. They are betting on our prosperity. They would not place that bet on a country in decline.

    The Conservatives are gleeful about the fact that there are challenges in this country. They propose no solutions and they continue to tear down, but what the rest of the world is seeing, through foreign direct investment, companies moving their headquarters here, talent coming to this country and researchers coming to this country, is that this is the place to build a future. That is because we have a Prime Minister and a government that are focused on that, know what it takes to build big things and are prepared to do the heavy lifting to get it done.

     The wider proof is real. Wages have outpaced inflation every single month this government has been in office. Foreign investment, as I said, is flowing to us faster now than it is to any of our closest peers. It is at an 18‑year high. Canada has now surpassed the United States as the most attractive market in the world for infrastructure investment. Our economy is now projected to grow the second fastest in the G7 this year and next. To me, this is not the portrait of a country in retreat, but a country that has decided to build again.

    The member opposite asked the government to “immediately...reverse all the economic policies” that got us here. I would ask him to be honest about what that actually means. Does it mean reversing the Major Projects Office? Does it mean eliminating the superdeduction that rewards firms for investing in this country? Does it mean eliminating the work to tear down the walls between our provinces or the $6 billion for 100,000 new tradespeople?

     While he is at it, let him tell that family at the kitchen table which of their savings he means to take back. Is it the national school food program, which his own party has called “garbage”? Is it the child care that his party leader calls a “slush fund”, which has benefited people in his own riding? Is it the dental care that seniors in his communities are currently benefiting from? Are those the programs he would choose to roll back?

    To the Conservatives, the help that gets a family through the month is a line item that they sneer at. It is something to be looked down upon. To us, it is precisely the point. It is lifting families up so that they can build success. We cannot rip out the scaffolding and claw back what families are counting on and call that a plan to build.

    I understand the impatience. After this many years and decades of building too little, Canadians have every right to be impatient, but impatience is not a reason to stop building and tear out the scaffolding. It is a reason to build faster. A family having a tough time does not need a politician to name their fear back to them, only louder. They have lived that fear. They do not need it performed as political theatre. The young person wondering if there is room for their future in this country does not need another performance of outrage from the members opposite, which has, sadly, become the only thing they seem to know how to do. Young people need us to build something worthy of their trust, and that is what our government has chosen to do.

    In times of crisis and in times of difficulty, Canadians expect us to come together and build big things. They expect us to put aside pettiness and all of the things we cannot do to focus on the things we can and should do. They expect us to show up with solutions.

    All of us who have kids know that when we have difficult conversations with them, a temper tantrum is not the way to a solution. Resolution comes through doing things together and showing by example. The Conservatives would have us believe that by ripping up the paper, tossing our toys and walking away, we are somehow going to build a stronger economy. That is not how economies are built. They are built by people who are prepared to invest in this country, which we are seeing now in record numbers. We are seeing that through workers who are prepared to be retrained today for the jobs of the future. That is what we are seeing. It comes with governments that are prepared to match the ambition Canadians have with what they need, which are the resources and the support to be able to get to those places.

    Danielle Smith talked about how working with this Prime Minister is a joy. David Eby talked about how working with this government is a joy. I am really curious to know how provincial governments, from Wab Kinew's and David Eby's to Doug Ford's and Danielle Smith's, look at this government and say this is a government they can work with, yet the Conservatives sit there and wonder why their poll numbers keep going down and Canadians refuse to return them to office. It is because premiers of all parties have recognized that this is a government that is prepared to work hard for Canadians, build things for Canadians and invest in the type of economy that Canadians want to see built in this country for a future their kids can look at and be proud of.

    Yes, we all know that times are tough. When times are tough, we work together. We are providing solutions to people to give them the supports they need to get through this period. We are showing them a path to a brighter future with the dollars, supports, commitments and, most importantly, the compassion and hope to be able to deliver on big things. We are doing that. We are backing it up by having the provinces and the private sector working with us.

     I encourage the Conservatives to stop the slogans and get to work for Canadians with us.

     Mr. Speaker, this is coming from a Liberal government that is completely out of ideas. Here is why.

     We let the Liberals have Bill C‑5 because they said it was the thing they needed to get business investment and get things built at speeds we have never seen before in this country. We worked with them to pass it because we agree that Canada needs to get building and start getting things done, yet not a single project from the Major Projects Office has been approved and advanced to any next stage.

     The Liberals then turned around and said that is not working. What else can they try? They decided to try a sovereign wealth fund, but they do not have any money to put into it, so they are going to borrow against it. They are going to use debt to finance it. It is going to cost Canadians $750 million a year just in debt service charges for their so-called sovereign wealth fund. It is going to be a debt fund. On top of that, they figured out that that is not going to work either, so now they are going to have consultations to figure out how to speed things up.

    The government is clueless. It has no idea. Why does it not pass the sovereignty act that the Conservatives proposed to get projects built?

     Mr. Speaker, I am not sure exactly what the question was. It sounded yet again like a litany of complaints and no new ideas, which is exactly what the opposition is devoid of.

     Perhaps I could tell them something they might be hopeful about. In my province of British Columbia, there are now four projects at the Major Projects Office. I understand that the Government of Alberta is looking forward to putting forward a proposition to be able to get energy resources to tidewater. It seems that the provinces, the country and the private sector are working together to ensure that we are building things.

    I understand the impatience on the other side. After all, the bill was passed less than a year ago. However, they somehow expect mines to spring out of the ground, mills to be built overnight and pipelines to randomly show up. People who have actually built things know that is not how things get done in this country, and it is not how we build real, resilient infrastructure.

     Mr. Speaker, in his speech, my colleague talked a bit about diversification. In their speeches, Conservative MPs like to talk a lot about market diversification to help our economy, but the only market diversification deal the Conservatives were able to strike was when they exported their leader from a riding in Ontario to a riding in Alberta.

     Can my colleague talk about the investments the Prime Minister was able to bring to this country that will help his riding and our country?

    Mr. Speaker, if we look at the number of trade agreements we now have with countries around the world, we can see that countries are seeking to invest in Canada. Whether they are countries in the Middle East or Europe, or our partners in the EU, more and more countries are looking at Canada with confidence as the place to invest. Why? It is because there is a government they can trust and rely on. There are Canadian workers who have talent and are the best in the world. We have research and researchers in this country coming up with the ideas of the future today.

     They see the convergence of those three things as a recipe for success and a place where they can place a bet, and they know our word means something.

    Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his speech. While we do not necessarily agree with everything in the Conservative motion before us today, we do believe it raises an interesting and relevant question to which I do not feel the government has provided an answer.

    Essentially, what the Conservatives are saying is that Canada is in a technical recession, that things are going badly and that the Liberals are to blame. The fact is I cannot say that they are not at least partly to blame. They are the ones in charge, after all. The Prime Minister, who was elected nearly a year ago, promised us he would resolve the tariff crisis with a wave of a magic wand.

    Here we are a year later, and nothing has changed. Now, today, the government is engaging in rhetoric by trying to contrast having agreements with our southern neighbour with having agreements with other countries around the world.

    Given the difficult situation, might it not be time for the government to sit down at the negotiating table with our southern neighbour?

    It might be time for the government to realize that we cannot really get by without doing business with them either.

    Mr. Speaker, in English, we say we should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

    We believe we need to work toward resolving the issue of U.S. tariffs. That is what we are doing. At the same time, we believe it is important to diversify our trade with other countries. That is why we have succeeded in establishing agreements with other countries for Canadian products, thereby creating opportunities for Canada to diversify—

    I have to interrupt the hon. member.

    The hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

    Mr. Speaker, today's motion is on a serious topic. However, it is written in a very unserious way.

    As we know, the United States has fundamentally changed its approach to trade with countries around the world, not just with Canada. However, given our geographic proximity to the United States and given the fact that it is our main trading partner, this tariff dispute, which we did not initiate, is having specific repercussions on the Canadian economy, our workers and our businesses. At the same time, conflicts around the world, particularly in the Middle East and Europe, are having significant impacts on supply chains, which in turn affect the global economy.

    In light of today's challenges, Canadians do not need political theatrics. They need a serious plan to strengthen our economy and make it more resilient. In last year's general election, Canadians had a choice between a team offering empty slogans and divisive politics, and a team with a plan to strengthen our economy. That is exactly what they chose.

    Since our election, we have been working to diversify the Canadian economy, facilitate the implementation of major projects of national interest, strengthen domestic demand, and support our workers and businesses.

    When we look at the motion tabled today, it is clear that the official opposition is not taking the current challenges seriously enough. Once again, it is presenting us with a motion that seems designed more to fuel social media content and generate sound bites than to propose concrete solutions and work with us for the benefit of the Canadian public.

    I can list a few examples to illustrate our work and the results we are achieving. When it comes to economic diversification, we have been working for over a year to strengthen our trade partnerships around the world. This enables our businesses to access new markets and, at the same time, attract foreign investment to Canada.

    In fact, over the last 12 months, we have made significant progress in this regard. We have signed more than 20 new economic and defence partnerships and secured nearly $97 billion in foreign investment commitment. These are concrete results. They have an impact on the Canadian economy as well as on the ground, in our ridings.

    For example, agriculture is an important sector of the economy in Madawaska—Restigouche, where many farmers grow potatoes. The new agreement with Mexico will give Canadian potato farmers access to a market of over 130 million consumers. I have talked to business owners in my riding about this, and they are very excited about the benefits of this new agreement. That is how we build a strong economy: by providing new markets and new opportunities for Canadian businesses.

    I also want to mention that, in our work to strengthen the Canadian economy, we are also looking to develop new sectors and build capacity in areas where we may be less competitive right now. I will use the commercial space industry as an example. Right now, Canada is the only G7 country without sovereign space launch capabilities. That means that our country, our businesses and our institutions have to rely on foreign countries, particularly the United States, to launch their satellites into orbit.

    This reliance has real-world consequences. It is diverting investment to other countries. Naturally, since we lack sovereign space launch capabilities, investors turn to other countries. This leads to costly delays for our companies, since they need to launch their satellites through other countries. In addition, our critical infrastructure is at the mercy of decisions that are beyond our control.

    In an increasingly uncertain and competitive world, Canada can no longer rely on others to guarantee its access to space. That is why we introduced a bill on Canadian space launches. This legislation will be a real game-changer by establishing the framework needed to build Canada's own space launch capabilities. The idea is to boost Canada's commercial space launch industry.

    These changes will have real benefits for the Canadian economy. They will help develop a new commercial space industry in Canada and create numerous opportunities, particularly in the telecommunications sector. This is a particularly promising area. We often hear about connectivity problems in rural areas. Certain emerging technologies like low-earth orbit satellites show a lot of potential for improving connectivity in regions that are currently underserved by cellular networks. However, if we want a seat at the table, we need to have the capacity to develop these technologies in Canada and then be able to launch our own satellites. This also opens up all sorts of interesting opportunities in navigation and natural resource development in remote regions, as well as in the defence sector.

    This will also help reduce costly delays for Canadian businesses. We also expect it to attract billions of dollars in investment to Canada. In fact, since the announcement of this bill, several Canadian and foreign space launch companies, as well as foreign governments, have approached our government to signal interest in doing business in Canada for satellite launches. This is creating new partnership opportunities with our NATO allies and strengthening Canadian sovereignty. It is a concrete example of how our plan to strengthen the economy also helps strengthen our defence capabilities and our sovereignty. Moreover, as a member from an Atlantic riding, I am pleased to note that this potential is particularly significant in the Atlantic provinces, where several spaceports are under development, including the Maritime Launch Services spaceport in Nova Scotia and NordSpace's Atlantic Spaceport Complex in Newfoundland and Labrador.

    When we talk about investments that will strengthen the domestic market, when we talk about investing in infrastructure, building housing and delivering major projects of national interest, we have to start by investing in our workforce and our workers. In last month's economic update, we announced a plan to increase the number of workers in the country's Red Seal trades. For starters, apprentices attending technical training can get up to $400 in financial support per week—$16,000 per year—plus a $5,000 bonus when they obtain their certification. We want to give them a financial incentive to help them complete their training from A to Z. We will also provide financial support to small and medium-sized businesses that offer on-the-job training because apprentices have to accumulate a certain number of hours to get certified. Specifically, we will provide up to $10,000 in wage subsidies to small and medium-sized businesses that take on apprentices. This is an effective way to increase the number of welders, electricians, plumbers and carpenters, to name just a few. These workers are essential to achieving our ambitious goal to build more in Canada.

    When we talk about providing employment opportunities, we also need to talk about youth. In budget 2025, we announced increased funding for the Canada summer jobs program. In my riding, it amounts to an investment of over $1.5 million this summer to support more than 400 jobs. These jobs provide practical work experience for young people in Madawaska—Restigouche. They will have an opportunity to work for community organizations, municipalities, day camps, the construction sector or SMEs. This wide range of employment opportunities might not have been available without this funding. For employers, SMEs, community organizations and municipalities, this is a game-changer. Over the past few weeks, I have called over 200 different employers in my riding to let them know the good news that they are going to receive funding this summer through this program. Based on the feedback I received, the program is making a real difference to them. I would like to take this opportunity to wish all the young people in my region who get jobs through the Canada summer jobs program a terrific summer.

    When we talk about building a stronger Canadian economy, we must also ensure that we build a fair and equitable system and that we are there for those who need it most. That is why all our efforts to strengthen the Canadian economy are accompanied by a social safety net. I am thinking of all the programs we have put in place over the years, including the Canada child benefit, the Canada disability benefit, the Canadian dental care plan, the affordable child care programs and the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. These programs make a huge difference to those who need them most. Unfortunately, when the official opposition is presented with measures that genuinely help people, their instinct is usually to oppose them.

    In closing, I think that we can see a contrast between this side of the House and the other side. The motion that is before us today is a joke. It was written in such a way that it cannot be supported. It seems to have been designed to generate sound bites for social media. It proposes very little in the way of concrete measures. On our side of the House, we do not let ourselves get distracted by this sort of grandstanding. From day one, we have remained focused on our work. Canadians gave us a clear mandate: to strengthen the Canadian economy and make it more resilient. That is what we are doing to deliver the results the public expects.

    Mr. Speaker, I love hearing my colleague accuse the Conservatives of being people who just want sound bites for social media. The point is that we are not making things up when we present the facts, when we talk about the loss of 113,400 jobs in Canada and when we talk about how people are struggling to put food on the table. We have the statistics to back up what we are saying.

    Statistics Canada has said that two consecutive quarters of negative growth mean we are headed for a recession. We are not making that up. I would like the member to provide further clarification on his way of thinking rather than attacking us in such a strange way.

    Mr. Speaker, I would invite my colleague to reread all the opposition motions that have been put forward in the past year.

    When it comes to the Conservatives, there is rarely anything substantive. It is always couched in hyperbole and exaggeration. There is little substance in their motions, and criticism comes easily. They are drafted in such a way that it is clear they cannot be supported.

    Personally, I would like to see more substance and more solutions in Conservative opposition day motions.

    We were talking about results, and we want results. Canada is expected to have the second-strongest growth in the G7 this year. Exports to non-U.S. markets are expected to double over the next decade. Foreign direct investment in Canada is up. We have signed more than 20 trade and partnership agreements around the world.

    These are concrete results that are making a real difference for the people we represent.

    Mr. Speaker, I thank my riding neighbour for his speech. He and I represent ridings where seasonal work is a reality.

    According to the IMF, Canada's household debt is one of the highest in the world right now. Those most often affected are low-income earners, our seasonal workers, the very people who are indispensable in economic sectors that serve as pillars of our regions, such as the fishing industry.

    I recently met Lise Lapierre of E. Gagnon & Fils, in Sainte-Thérèse-de-Gaspé. She spends long hours pushing carts full of crabs and lobsters. In spite of everything, she is dealing with the EI spring gap. This year, it lasted from March through mid-April.

    Does my colleague not think that, to address the economic situation, this government needs to wake up and quickly reform employment insurance to put an end to the spring gap for seasonal workers?

    Mr. Speaker, in our most recent economic update, we announced a funding extension for the pilot project providing five additional weeks of benefits in 13 economic regions, including the two regions in my riding. I believe my colleague's riding is also included in this pilot project. This will provide five additional weeks of regular EI benefits to help bridge what is commonly referred to as the “spring gap”.

    This is in addition to other measures we have implemented, such as eliminating the one-week waiting period for EI benefits.

    Mr. Speaker, I too want to thank my riding neighbour for his speech.

    He talked a lot about infrastructure. There is an infrastructure fund that has been very useful for his riding and mine. The Conservatives voted against that fund. It is the rural transit solutions fund.

    My riding and my colleague's riding are now connected by a public transit system, which is something our ridings did not have before. My colleagues can imagine how hard it was not having public transit. Now we do have public transit in our ridings thanks to the programs that the government implemented.

    Could my colleague tell us how this program has helped people in his region get to other regions?

    Could he also tell us how even tourists to our region are now able to benefit from this new service?

     Mr. Speaker, our federal funding covered a substantial portion of the capital costs of providing a public transit service that is truly tailored to rural regional realities. FlexGo is providing affordable service that meets the needs of our seniors, workers and post-secondary students.

    Since this service was launched, it has made a huge difference on the ground and in people's lives. This is an investment that is contributing to the economic vitality of our communities while providing an essential service for people who may not have any other way to get around. It has been a resounding success from the start. Ridership has been even higher than predicted.

    This is a concrete example of how we are contributing to our rural regions.

    Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister was asked about the recession he created, he ran away like a scared jackrabbit.

    Can the member tell me where the Prime Minister is?

    Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister works every day to implement our plan to build the Canadian economy.

    One need only look at the results; they speak for themselves. More than twenty new partnerships have been launched around the world. We have attracted foreign investment to Canada. We have the second-strongest economic growth among G7 countries—

    The member's time is up.

    I will just remind members, we are getting close to that thin line in mentioning the presence or absence of members of this place; we are not going to go down that road.

    Resuming debate, the hon. Leader of the Opposition.

     Mr. Speaker, on Friday morning, we learned that Canada is the only G7 country in a recession. This is the topic the member for Edmonton West will address, as I will be sharing my time with him. As he will explain, we are the only G7 country in a recession. For the past five days, we have been waiting for a response from the Prime Minister, a man who has portrayed himself as a brilliant economist and crisis manager. For five days, we have been in crisis due to the revelation that our economy is the only one in decline, for two consecutive quarters. We are the only country in North America that is in a recession.

    What does the Prime Minister have to say about this?

    First, he said nothing. It took four days before he spoke to reporters. Last night, he approached a reporter. He thought she might ask him a nice question, perhaps give him a compliment. He was very happy. When she got to the microphone, the reporter asked him a question about the recession. Suddenly, he was unable to speak. He turned around and dodged the question. That is quite a response from a great economist.

    This morning, we asked him the question: Is Canada in a recession?

    He did not answer, other than to say that the economy is weak. Yes, it is weak. It is not the biggest and fastest-growing economy in the G7, as he had promised. It is a weak economy. Then he started making up excuses.

    Today, we are going to deal with the excuses that the Prime Minister is coming up with to justify having the only recession in the G7. Today, he says it is purely accidental and that if we take a closer look at the data, we will see that the investment component of GDP is up.

    Let us look at the report that Statistics Canada released on May 29, 2026. What does it say about investment?

    Allow me to quote a line from that report:

    Investment has been down for five straight quarters. One of the causes of this recession is the dearth of investment. Based on the numbers since this Prime Minister took office, there has been a net decline of $20 billion in investment. In fact, we have the worst investment numbers in the G7, and we can see that the only economic aspects that went up last quarter are government spending and consumption, not investment.

    The Liberals' second excuse is that this is just a technical recession.

    There is no such thing as a technical recession. Two consecutive quarters of negative growth is, by definition, a recession. The Liberals and their friends say we cannot just look at a single data point, so, okay, let us look at more data points.

    In the first three months of this year, 112,000 jobs were lost. The net number of jobs lost since the Prime Minister took office a year ago is 45,000.

    Canada's unemployment rate is the second-highest in the G7. It is one-third higher than in the United States. The economy contracted in three of the last four quarters since the Prime Minister came to power. Our economy has bled more than $20 billion in net investment. A total of $109 billion drained out of the Canadian economy, and only $89 billion flowed in. Most of that foreign investment has been used by foreign corporations to take control of Canadian businesses. There has been no real, material investment.

    Canada has by far the highest level of household debt in the G7. This may be why Equifax reported that the number of insolvency cases had reached levels not seen since 2019, with a 19% increase over the previous year. In fact, 1.5 million Canadians missed a minimum payment on their debts. The mortgage delinquency rate rose by 32% compared to the previous year.

     When we look at the numbers in Canada, it is clear that we are in a recession because of the Liberal policies that have been imposed. No, they cannot use the usual excuse of tariffs or global factors. Every other country in the world is facing these challenges, but no other G7 country except Canada is in a recession. Mexico is part of North America and shares a border with the United States, but it is not in a recession. Canada is the only one in a recession.

    That is why we need to reverse the Liberal policies that caused the recession. The recession was caused by taxes, anti-development laws, government red tape and the doubling of the deficit. We, the Conservatives, are proposing to cut taxes on labour, energy, investment and housing construction. To reduce the cost and size of government, we are proposing to cut red tape, consultants, business support, foreign aid, handouts for bogus refugees and so on. The free enterprise system will enable us to grow our economy and cut costs. That is a real solution and that is what we are proposing today.

    I rise today to address the news from Friday that Canada is the only G7 country in a recession. Five days have gone by, and the Prime Minister has not bothered to answer a single question in the House of Commons addressing this terrible news. He said he was a man with a plan, a guy who could handle a crisis, and yet for four days, he would not even take media questions on the fact that Canada was the only G7 country in a recession.

    Yesterday, while walking out from a speech, a journalist called him over. He had a big smile on his face, expecting that the media was going to again throw rose petals at him. When he arrived and found that the question was about the recession, he said oh, ah, and he turned around and walked away, that being his first response after four days of learning that Canada is in a recession, the only country in the G7 in a recession.

    Today, he finally took a few questions from the media but refused to answer whether we were in a recession. He did make a number of excuses. He claimed that it was just that some aspects of GDP shrunk. In reality, he said, investment, is up.

    What does Statistics Canada say about that? The report that broke the news of the recession said, “Business capital investment fell 0.7% in the first quarter of 2026, the fifth consecutive quarterly decline.”

    It is not true, Mr. Prime Minister, that investment is up. In fact, the only things that were up were government spending and consumption, meaning that Canadians had to spend more just to survive. The things one would want to be up, like the net exports, were down. We have a trade deficit. Investment was also down.

    He went on to claim that, in fact, it was just a technical recession. In what sense is it technical? The textbook definition of a recession is two back-to-back quarters of negative growth. That definition is met.

     Liberals then say, as the Prime Minister said today, that we cannot focus just on one thing. I agree. Let us focus on the other data points.

    In the first three months of the year, 112,000 jobs were lost. Since the Prime Minister took office, on a net basis, there are 45,000 more Canadians unemployed. We have the second-highest unemployment in the G7, a third higher than in the United States. Of the last four quarters under the Prime Minister, the economy has shrunk in three of them. Business investment is down 0.7%. Over $20 billion of net investment has fled since he took office. Equifax reported that insolvency rates have increased to levels not seen since 2009, up 19% year over year, and 1.5 million Canadians have missed a debt payment in the first three months of this year alone, with mortgage delinquency rates up 32% year over year. Canada has the biggest household debt load of any country in the G7. The CEO of the Daily Bread Food Bank in Toronto said that one-tenth of Toronto is now eating at a food bank. That is the real cost.

    This is not technical. Hunger in the bellies of Canadians who cannot pay their bills is not technical. Canadians need a reversal in the Liberal policies, and that is what we are fighting for today. Let us have a strong, affordable and safe Canada.

    Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal more confidence in the Bank of Canada than I have in the leader of the Conservative Party. The Bank of Canada has indicated that the Conservative Party might be a little off on this. Conservatives might be glad that Canada, from their point of view, is in a recession, but, in reality, it is one of a number of factors. GDP has to be taken into consideration. Even though they might be gleeful on the other side, we on this side of the House will continue to work to build a stronger, healthier Canada and economy.

    Does the leader of the Conservative Party have anything positive to say about Canada and how Canada is going to lead in growth in different areas?

    Mr. Speaker, the member asked two questions.

    Do I have anything positive to say about Canada? I have plenty of positive things to say about Canada, particularly the resilience of the Canadian people who, because of their hardiness, are able to endure the punishment that the Liberal government continues to mete out.

     Do I have anything to say about the growth that the government claims the economy is going to lead on? I cannot say anything about that because the government and the economy it leads are not leading the G7 in any metric, other than the most household debt, the most expensive housing and the fastest-increasing food costs. In all of those areas, the economy is leading under the Liberal government and, of course, the first economy to go into a recession. That is not the type of leadership we want for our economy.

    Mr. Speaker, my question is for my colleague, the Leader of the Opposition.

    I have been fortunate to sit in Parliament for a little over 10 years. For a little over 10 years, I have had the opportunity to listen to his excellent speeches. They tend to be very good.

    However, every time my colleague rises in the House, ever since I first had the opportunity to listen to his speeches, I get a sense that they always boil down to much the same thing. To hear him speak, anyone would think we are constantly on the verge of an apocalypse.

    Obviously, I am not saying that the economic situation is positive; far from it. However, I wonder if he should perhaps change his approach; furthermore, in his criticism today, he said that the Liberal plan is bad for the economy.

    However, if we look at the Liberal government's record over the past year, we see that it has implemented measures essentially proposed by the Conservative Party. He says himself that the Liberals spend their time stealing his ideas.

    Is he telling us that Conservative ideas are partly responsible for this apocalypse?

    Mr. Speaker, I would love to say that the Liberals have stolen our ideas. They have done so in words, but not in action. They have not put those ideas into practice.

    Over the Liberals' 10 years in government, they have increased the cost of government, doubled the national debt, expanded the bureaucracy and public spending, and blocked the development of our natural resources.

    In the last election, they promised to turn things around, but nothing has happened. It was nothing more than an illusion.

    The Liberal Prime Minister has kept all the anti-development laws in place. He has doubled Justin Trudeau's deficit. He has increased the cost of the bureaucracy. The government now accounts for a larger share of the economy than at any time in the past 30 years. All the anti-development taxes are still in place.

    I wish the Liberals would actually implement the ideas they steal from us, not just pay lip service to them.

    Mr. Speaker, on Friday, it was announced Canada had entered a recession and it is no coincidence that shortly thereafter, Food Banks Canada brought out its poverty report. Perhaps Liberals will not believe what we are saying about their reckless policies that are harming Canadians. The Food Bank report gave Canada an overall grade of a D+, an F for employment rate and an F for food security. Right now, one in four or 25% of Canadians are food-insecure.

    Can the leader talk about Conservative policies that will bring back a Canada that will work for all Canadians?

    Yes, Mr. Speaker, this is the human cost of the Liberal recession. Canadians cannot afford to eat. In fact, yesterday's report demonstrated that about 25% of Canadians are food-insecure and 25% of food banks at some point last year actually ran out of food. Imagine being that single mother at the checkout, her bank account empties and when she tries to pay with her debit card, it is rejected. She looks at the lineup of people who all just saw her get rejected. She gets into her car humiliated, makes her way to the food bank and it is empty. What does she do now?

    Liberals say that this is just a technical recession. I ask them to look that mother in the eye and say that her children's hunger is technical. There is nothing technical about it. There are real human costs for the Liberal government's failures, and if the Prime Minister cared at all about those costs and the people paying them, he would come into the House of Commons and answer a question about it, for once.

     Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today on our motion.

    Food Banks Canada had a stark warning, and this is a stark quote from its most recent report: “Something fundamental has shifted in Canada.” It goes on to further say that, in Canada, “a job is no longer enough to ensure a reliable pathway to stability.” One in four Canadians is facing food insecurity, and 20% of the 2.2 million lining up every month at food banks are employed. I am going to read again that line from the report: in Canada, “a job is no longer enough to ensure a reliable pathway to stability.” That is what over a decade of the Liberal government has inflicted upon Canada. Something has fundamentally changed in this country, and it has fundamentally changed for the worse because of the government.

    In Edmonton alone, we have two separate food banks just serving veterans. Those who have served our country in the military, but also RCMP, have two separate food banks to serve them, just for them to get by. At the same time, we have the Prime Minister spending close to $200,000 for gourmet meals on his jet just for three trips, while the Liberals are spending $200 million for Liberal insiders for a concrete pad, a cement pad, in Nova Scotia.

    Canada has entered recession territory. The Liberals will quibble and say that it is only a technical recession and really does not count, but the economy is shrinking: not just the last two quarters, but three of the last four quarters. We are the only G7 country with a shrinking economy. In fact, even basket cases like France and Italy do not have shrinking economies. We are in fact the only economy that has shrunk in the last four quarters in the G7. No one else has: not the U.S., not Germany, which continues on its path to net-zero economic suicide, and not Italy, without all the oil resources we have, but just us. Again, think of the old world, the G7, and all the issues they are having with the Ukraine war and being cut off from their natural gas resources, and yet somehow they have avoided a recession like ours.

     This GDP issue reflects our stagnating standard of living and anemic productivity growth and highlights our weakness in business investments. According to the Fraser Institute, investment in plants, machinery equipment and IP has fallen 20% as a share of the economy in the last 10 years. I wonder what happened 10 years ago that would cause us to be on such a decline. Further, the last four years have seen this decline accelerate, matching about four years ago when the current Prime Minister started helping the government as a special economic adviser. What a coincidence, I know.

    More sobering news is from the Bank of Canada monetary policy report. The member for Winnipeg North just previously was saying that the Liberals believe in the Bank of Canada and that the Bank of Canada has all the information, and he asked if we did not believe in the Bank of Canada. Well, I believe in the Bank of Canada monetary policy report, which actually shows that the government is misleading Canadians on growth. The Bank of Canada is predicting, next year, a 16% lower GDP growth than the government just did in its spring budget. The year after that, it is predicting a 13% lower growth. I ask the member for Winnipeg North whom he believes. Does he believe the Bank of Canada, as he just stated he does, or does he not now, when it is not convenient for him?

    Even the Bank of Canada does not believe the government when it says that we are the fastest-growing economy in the G7. We are not.

    Further, which is even more sobering, for 2026, of the anemic growth that we have under the Liberal government, the Bank of Canada is saying 75% is from added government spending. It is not from exporting oil, perhaps, and not from IP or investment, but from government spending. In 2027, 44% of the growth in the forecast is government spending. The year after, 25% of all the growth that the Bank of Canada is seeing in GDP is coming from government spending. This is not a way to grow out of the troubles we are in, by just simply borrowing more money and spending more money. Over the next five years, we are going to have almost $400 billion just in interest payments. What are we getting for it? We are not getting growth, like the one we see in the other countries. We are seeing a shrinking economy.

    What do we do about this? Well, apart from joining Marty McFly and Doc Brown, getting into a DeLorean and going back to 2015 to ensure that Trudeau does not get elected, we can change the policies now. We can start undoing the Liberal policies that are wrecking the economy.

     The Chamber of Commerce, just recently in a submission to the finance committee, said that the government needs to focus on competitiveness, and that we cannot compete globally because of a regulatory and red tape regime that is seen as cumbersome and anti-investment. We have well over 300,000 different rules and regulations, over 450 different acts, sometimes with thousands of regulations per act that are tying up and slowing our economic growth. What does the government do? Well, normal governments around the world would perhaps say, “Well, let us reduce red tape. Let us cut some of the red tape.”

    We know defence procurement is a mess, but instead of actually addressing it, the government created another bureaucracy to work around its own rules that it created. For major projects, it is same thing, adding more bureaucracy to work around the other bureaucracy it created. Further, the government created another bureaucracy for red tape reduction, and 34 full-time equivalents were added to the bureaucracy to cut red tape.

     We submitted an Order Paper question asking what the government managed to cut for regulations. With 34 full-time employees, we ended up with 29 regulations repealed. Here are some of them. They repealed UN regulations regarding Sierra Leone. Wow, that is going to grow the economy. They cut regulations on corded window covering products. They cut regulations regarding board elections for the Wheat Board, years after the Wheat Board went away. This is what 34 full-time employees managed to do over a period of a couple of years to cut red tape. They changed regulations on the Wheat Board elections for the board of directors of a Wheat Board that does not exist anymore.

     How are we going to grow the economy if this is the best the government can do? We could get our energy products to market. We could build pipelines. We could get rid of the oil and gas emissions cap. The government will say that we do not have that anymore, but it has not come out and said that the cap is dead. We could get rid of the anti-Alberta tanker ban, Bill C-48. We have a private member's bill before this House right now to eliminate the tanker ban, and Liberals are opposing it. It is perfectly fine to have Saudi Arabia oil come up the St. Lawrence, but we cannot have Alberta oil off the north B.C. coast. We could get rid of the costly industrial carbon tax and the unconstitutional “no new pipelines” bill, Bill C-69.

     If we want northern gateway to get built, which could add tens of billions of dollars of added growth to the economy, the government needs to get out of the way. It needs to kill Bill C-48, the anti-Alberta tanker ban. It needs to kill Bill C-69. It needs to get rid of the oil and gas emissions cap. We need to get rid of the government's determination to wreck our economy.

     Mr. Speaker, it has been just over one year since Canadians went to the polls and elected a new government. Some of the tangible actions we have seen in that one year include the fact that international exports beyond the United States have significantly increased. We can talk about rents, which have been going down. We can talk about the average household net worth, which has actually improved. We can talk about Canada's AAA credit rating and the fact that we have the best financial position of the G7 countries. We are still providing the types of programs that deal with the issue of affordability, like the groceries and essentials rebate, and providing assurances in regard to other social programs, like our child care program.

    Would the member not agree that this is very much a holistic approach to building a stronger and healthier economy?

    Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Winnipeg North for fiction hour in the House of Commons. What has the government delivered in over 10 years? It is not a new government. It is the same old, tired Liberal government. It has delivered rising unemployment, record debt, record deficit and record Canadians at food banks. The government has delivered an economy that requires us to have two food banks just to serve veterans in Edmonton. That is what this 10-year-old tired, corrupt Liberal government has delivered for Canadians.

    Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge my former seatmate here.

    I would like to ask the following. The economic update did not take into account the new 25% tariffs imposed by President Trump on all products containing steel or aluminum. This will have a particular impact on Quebec, as 25% of exports from Quebec SMEs to the United States will be affected.

    Does my colleague think that measures should be taken to support these businesses? The Bloc Québécois is proposing a wage subsidy to help employers maintain ties with their employees.

    What does my colleague think?

    Mr. Speaker, my colleague brought up a lot of great points. The Prime Minister twice promised to get a deal done by last summer. Twice, he has not delivered. The best thing we can do for my colleagues from Quebec and their constituents is deliver a deal. The government has failed to do so, despite repeated promises by the Prime Minister.

    Mr. Speaker, the Liberals keep saying that there is so much growth in Canada, so let us take a look at the growth that I am seeing. I am seeing growth in inflation, which was up 0.5% in April, and growth in unemployment in April. Food bank usage is up massively. We are also seeing that business capital investment fell 0.7% in the first quarter of 2026, which was the fifth consecutive quarter in which business capital investment in Canada dropped. I am wondering what my colleague thinks about that and if he has any ideas about how to get the government back in line.

     Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, in a submission to the finance committee, laid it out. They stated that the current environment imposed on businesses by this government makes investment unwelcome. Canada needs to change. We need tax reform, and we need regulatory reform. As the Chamber of Commerce has stated, we need to fix our regulatory regime. We need tax reform. We need the government to stop standing here and pretending that all these announcements are serving Canadians. It actually needs to take action.

    Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the same question. At the end of the day, if we are not investing back in our businesses, how are we going to grow the economy? After five quarters of negative growth in business investment, how exactly are we going to grow our economy?

    Mr. Speaker, the member makes a great point. The Canadian economy is shrinking. Mexico has a far greater reliance on U.S. trade than Canada does, and its economy is not shrinking. In fact, its auto industry exports to the U.S. are double what they are in Canada, yet somehow Mexico is managing to grow its economy with the same issues we have. What it does not have holding it back is a Liberal government.

    Mr. Speaker, I am happy to be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands.

     I will be opposing the motion. We have a comprehensive plan. I am seeing in my travels across the country and in my riding that the plan is starting to deliver results. If we take an honest look at the full set of strategies the government has announced, the measures as early as June, with the income tax cut and the delivery of the Major Projects Office, forward to the budget in the fall, with major measures to prime our economy, through to the spring economic update and the strategies we have announced during and since then, we see a plan that is starting to work and to have impacts on the ground.

    I want to refer to a couple of these strategies because they provide important context when the official opposition is calling for a plan. The plans have been presented and are starting to land, I think, quite positively with Canadians.

    I will give the example of the national electricity strategy, which we announced just recently, with an intent to double our capacity by 2050. We know that electricity is a key competitive advantage for Canada and that we have abundant and relatively clean electricity. This is an area where Canadian ingenuity, workers and opportunities coast to coast are available to develop the kinds of technologies that help lower costs and emissions, and help to prime and benefit industries at home, but also lead in some cases to an exportable technology.

    I know there are a lot of innovators in Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park who are working on businesses and innovations that are delivering, whether that is a more efficient grid, solutions that are putting power back into the grid or, indeed, solutions that are using previous internal combustion engine-based or fossil fuel technologies and converting them into cleaner technologies. The national electricity strategy is a very prominent example of one of the plans that exist in our broader plan to deliver economic well-being to Canadians.

     I would also refer to the critical minerals strategy, which is, again, a key competitive advantage for Canada. We need to have the processing capacity and to identify the specific minerals that are available to us. The Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and other ministers have taken a leadership role in creating buyers' clubs by bringing companies, countries and investment funds together to identify real opportunities and then using the Major Projects Office to deliver opportunities to get those projects under way more quickly. A critical minerals strategy is key to our economic plan.

     I would also refer to our auto strategy, which I, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry, have some considerable involvement with, as it is the Minister of Industry's strategy. She is working very hard to protect access to the American marketplace and to protect the investments that exist in Canada but also to attract not only new investments around electrification and electric vehicles but also related investments in software and electric vehicle charging infrastructure. I am very proud to see that some of these sectors, which previously were confined to southern Ontario, are now spreading across the country.

     I had the pleasure of going to the electric vehicle and charging expo recently in Toronto. It was such a pleasure to see companies from coast to coast to coast delivering innovations, including electricity charging for vehicles at apartment buildings in Vancouver, all-in software solutions out of Quebec and even the first green hydrogen heavy truck vehicle, developed by Elemental Trucks out of Rexdale. There are so many innovations coming out of Canada, from Canadians, out of this opportunity and this excitement around the kind of economy we are building. We are seeing it in the numbers. My colleagues the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Finance and the chief government whip have already referred to some of these statistics and some real benefits that are coming from these strategies.

     I will also refer to an area that I spend a bit more time on, the research and science portfolio, where we are seeing people coming by the hundreds from around the world, some of the most talented scientists, who are attracted by our impact+ research chairs program and our impact+ scholars program, to say that Canada is the place to do science. We just recently announced 658 doctoral and post-doctoral researchers. The best and brightest in the world are choosing Canada in part because, first, this is the place to do science and research, a place that is not going to be corrupted by politics, and second, there is economic opportunity and the hope that comes from the ability to do this work and deliver these innovations in Canada, for Canada and for Canadians.

     I see the benefits of our economic strategy starting to take root in places like the University of Calgary, where I recently had the chance to visit a Genome Canada‑funded project. This is one of the great stories, and I am seeing so many of these stories coast to coast now, where we have eastern and western Canada coming together to deliver the kinds of innovations that are going to grow our economy. The specific project I saw was a project to make underground energy storage safer by using tiny underground microbes. This is a set of University of Calgary researchers collaborating with a Newfoundland and Labrador start-up, Triple Point resources. Again, there is confidence. This is a Canadian start-up out of Newfoundland and Labrador, which is investing its precious capital in innovation toward a carbon-reducing solution, collaborating with scientists out of the University of Calgary. This is the kind of national economic spirit that we are seeing more and more of, that this Prime Minister, with this government, is delivering.

    We know that this has been the year for space in Canada. I was recently in Longueuil, Quebec, at the Canadian Space Agency headquarters, as part of the Horizons conference co-developed by the Canadian Space Agency and Space Canada, a government agency and an industry association working very closely together to ensure that the future space economy is one that Canada can depend on and benefit from. It is in this year of science, when we have not one but three Canadian Space Agency astronauts intimately involved in some of the key missions that have captured the globe's attention: Jeremy Hansen, Jenni Gibbons and, soon to go to the International Space Station, Joshua Kutryk. The Canadian inspiration around that has resulted in more interest and more investment. I meet a number of young people now who are starting rocket clubs, who are excited about participating in this sector and who often can get support through our research funds to then develop that kind of science and innovation. This is part of our economic strategy as well.

     I see this locally as well, with companies like TransPod, out of my riding, which is developing a high-speed transportation solution between Calgary and Edmonton. Again, this is a Canadian company in eastern Canada working collaboratively with those in western Canada. I see it with a company like Beachman industries, again, in my riding of Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, which is one of the first companies in decades to get certified by Transport Canada for motorcycle manufacturing. It is Canada's only electric motorcycle manufacturer. The co-founders have big ambitions to take this innovative technology and to grow it into the transportation space, delivering transportation solutions. They are Canadian innovators in auto manufacturing, and in this case, it is happening right in the heart of downtown Toronto.

     What I also appreciate about our economic strategy, though, and I do not hear much about it from the other side, is that the economy is not just the GDP. It is the GDP per capita, so I do want to compliment my colleague the parliamentary secretary, but it is about much more than any one statistic. It is about the kind of community we create that makes it possible to have economic activity. It is about the kind of community we create that gives people the confidence, the support and the resources to participate productively in the economy, like national child care and the PSW tax credit.

     I had the pleasure of speaking at the SEIU excellence awards, the first-ever awards event that the Service Employees International Union put on for its health care workers, Local 1. I saw those PSWs, mostly women, mostly educated in other countries, say that, yes, because of the work done together and because of the government recognition of that work, there is going to be a tax credit that is going to recognize their specific efforts during the pandemic and beyond. That is going to put aroun $1,100 in those workers', mostly women's, pockets. Members can bet that is going to help the economy in those households because those families, those women, are going to be spending that money out in the economy.

     I even see it in places like the many business improvement areas that we are blessed to have in Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, which is the home of the original business improvement area, in Bloor West Village. We are hearing from them that, yes, public safety is really important, and there is some appreciation for the new provisions around bail legislation, and that public safety and the public realm as well as supporting people at different levels of the economic scale and different income levels are key to having a strong economy. In Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, we are very appreciative of the opportunity to see that.

     Finally, in my riding, I see it in the housing we are building, whether it is social housing, supportive housing or some of the co-operative or private sector housing that I will be happy to talk about in future months in the riding. The kinds of housing opportunities we are creating in the riding create an opportunity to participate economically in a much more productive way. It is a kind of investment in housing that, unfortunately, I hear regularly criticized by the other side.

    We have an economic plan that is starting to land with Canadians, and I look forward to questions on it from my colleagues.

    Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the way talked a lot about investment in research, so I am going to ask a straightforward question.

     When it comes to investment in research in Saskatchewan, we are losing two research farms in the agriculture industry because the Liberals have cut the funding for agriculture research. Also, at Environment Canada, they have cut funding for radar research, which is going to hamper our ability to give warnings when heavy snow, rainfall and blizzards happen.

    If he is going to brag about the research funding the Liberals have done, what about the people they are leaving behind in Saskatchewan with the agricultural research cuts and the radar research cut at Environment Canada?

    Mr. Speaker, I had the chance to visit Saskatoon in January or February of this year, and I had the pleasure to visit the facilities and the labs that are being funded at the University of Saskatchewan, in particular the VIDO vaccine facility, a world-leading facility, as well as the cyclotron facility. They are world-leading major research facilities that are, again, attracting scientists from around the world, as well as SAIT. SAIT and the University of Saskatchewan have a really strong collaboration that brings research together, at both the college and university levels.

    Mr. Speaker, looking at how the Canadian economy has been performing, it is clear that the real problem is exports. We know that the forestry industry is being hit hard by 45% countervailing duties, which of course limits its ability to export competitively to the American market.

    We in the Bloc Québécois proposed that the government buy back the countervailing duties, the money owed to our businesses, in order to give them a bit of liquidity.

    Why did the government not take up our suggestion?

    Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat familiar with the challenges my colleague is talking about. I am from Bathurst, New Brunswick, which is right across Chaleur Bay. I am therefore very familiar with the challenges and issues facing the forestry industry. We have been hit hard by U.S. tariffs for decades. We are working very hard. We are in close contact.

    As for my colleague's suggestions, I know that, on our side, we have supported the industry through the strategic fund and other support measures, but we are always happy to continue the conversation with him.

    Mr. Speaker, the Permanent Peoples' Tribunal concluded that Canada's ongoing policies amount to genocide, pointing specifically to the government's seized value of indigenous lands, territories and resources. The tribunal noted that part of the issue is related to the failure of the government to obtain the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples.

    Will the government begin to uphold its constitutional obligations and uphold section 35(3) rights? Will it take this finding very seriously and respect the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples, or is it going to continue building a pipeline to the court?

     Mr. Speaker, UNDRIP and indigenous rights, as well as doing economic development with indigenous peoples, I think, are foundational principles of this government. We have seen it reflected through some of the recent deals that have been announced. I hope to continue to work on it from this side, along with colleagues who are interested.

    Mr. Speaker, building a strong economy means helping our businesses innovate. One of the tools we have is scientific research and experimental development tax incentives.

    I would like the parliamentary secretary to comment on the work we are doing to improve and enhance this tax incentive program, which is very important to many businesses in our regions.

    Mr. Speaker, my colleague champions that kind of research.

    In the spring economic update, we increased funding for research at community colleges, building on a very solid foundation thanks to historic investments in the 2024 and 2025 budgets for research on defence and international intellectual capital.

     Mr. Speaker, I have been sitting in the House today for the better part of the debate listening to members. Earlier today, I was here for the opening speech by the critic, the member for Calgary East, when he was introducing the motion. I do not know if I just got bored of listening to the same rhetoric by the Conservatives, but I started staring down at the motion as it was written on my piece of paper and wondered what AI would think of this motion. I literally took a picture of it and asked AI, “What do you think of this motion?” This is literally the response—

    Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I believe the chief government whip just acknowledged taking a photo in the House while he was sitting there, which is against the rules. I hope you will urge him to delete that, Mr. Speaker.

     Technically, I do not think he said he took the picture while in the House, but of course, the member will take corrective action if that is so warranted.

    I will allow the member to continue with his commentary.

    Mr. Speaker, this is literally what the response was that I got from AI about the motion. Word for word, it said, “This motion is built for maximum rhetorical punch, not factual or analytical strength. The motion collapses complex economic indicators into a simplistic, worse-than-the-G7 narrative, cherry-picks metrics without context and demands an impossible remedy that has no coherent policy meaning.”

    I hear my friend from Saskatchewan across the way criticizing AI. I would remind him to tread lightly in this area, given the fact that I am pretty certain at least 70% to 80% of the questions asked during question period by the Conservatives are generated by AI, before he goes down that path of trying to be critical of it. I can understand why he does not like listening to what was generated as a response, but it is the reality of the situation.

    The real irony is not that AI spit out the obvious and what everybody already knows. What it really comes down to is that this is exactly what Canadians are feeling right now in watching the Leader of the Opposition's response to what has happened. Let us just take ourselves back to Friday morning when Statistics Canada released information that we were in a technical recession by a declining growth of, listen to this, negative 0.03%. We are talking about a really small percentage.

    The Leader of the Opposition jumped on this news like it was the biggest gift he has ever received. He was so gleeful about it. He gathered whoever he could from his caucus who remained here on a Friday; they usually disappear halfway through question period on a Thursday. He dragged them out in front of this building, lined them up behind himself at 9:30 a.m. and gave a press conference with a gigantic smile on his face. He was so excited by this news.

    Imagine being a member of this House, one of the 343 members, let alone the Leader of the Opposition, and taking such joy in knowing that Canadians are suffering? That is exactly what we saw from him. That is not even where it ended, because it got even worse than that.

    Rightly so, a reporter from The Hill Times asked the Leader of the Opposition, on the topic of the economy, “Might you be going a little too far with this by suggesting that this is a massive, colossal economic situation?” The Leader of the Opposition, the member for Battle River—Crowfoot, started laughing at the reporter and said, “Of course you are making excuses for the Prime Minister. What outlet are you from?” The reporter said The Hill Times, and the Conservative leader said, “Oh, yeah, The Hill Times.”

    What I find so utterly amazing is that Conservatives, much less the Leader of the Opposition, are unable to recognize that their strategy may have been really effective in 2024, but with everything going on in the world right now, with the way that the U.S. is positioning itself against us right now and is treating us like an economic enemy at times, and with the sense of incredible pride that Canadians have in wanting to stick together and fight this together, the Conservatives still think that it is a winning strategy to talk down Canadians, to talk down the Prime Minister and to talk down the position we are in. I can wonder all day long about why the Conservatives think this is an effective strategy, why they are doing this and why they have not realized that their 2024 tactics are just falling on deaf ears right now.

    People do not even have to listen to me. They do not even have to consider the fact that I am bringing this to their attention. They can just look at the fact that it is reflected in the polling. It is reflected in the decision in the last election. Canadians do not want the Conservatives. They do not want that rhetoric. They do not want that style of approach. They do not want a Leader of the Opposition who is going to laugh at reporters, challenge what outlet they are with and then dismiss them. Canadians do not want that.

    I really wish that my colleagues across the way, who keep heckling me right now, would take a moment to reflect on the fact that maybe there is a little bit of truth to what I am saying. Maybe the Canadian people would like to see humility and would like to see a Leader of the Opposition who actually takes the time to reflect on the world that people live in and does not jump at an opportunity to celebrate it, so that he can say “I told him so” to the Prime Minister on what amounts to a statistical error.

    An hon. member: Oh, oh!

    Hon. Mark Gerretsen: Mr. Speaker, it is negative 0.03% of growth. I am sorry. It is catastrophic. Look at them. They are doing it right now. They absolutely refuse. They want to make this the biggest, boldest and absolutely worst thing that could possibly happen. That is the narrative they are going with.

    I am actually not surprised, because they are just parroting what their leader did on Friday. He went outside this building, and he took the opportunity to celebrate the position that Canada was in.

    Conservatives can keep doing this. They can do it all day long, but I am telling them right now that this is not selling to the Canadian public. The Canadian public is not buying this.

    By the way, the Conservatives did this before. What situation did they set up for themselves? Their approach, always, is not asking what they are going to do to improve the lives of Canadians. Their approach is to make the other guy look bad, attack the other guy and beat him or her into submission so that they look like the champions.

    Guess what? They tried that in 2024. To a certain degree, they were kind of effective at it, but it did not materialize into their forming government, did it? It did not. They just ended up coming right back. It certainly did not result in Conservatives forming government.

    The key thing they are missing is that, rather than just attack, attack, attack, they have to provide solutions. They have to provide alternatives. I have said this so many times in the House.

    I am actually trying to give them political advice right now. People back in my war room are probably asking why I will not shut up, because I am telling them what to do, but it is true. I am just trying to help them because I feel like they really, genuinely need it.

    The reality is that Conservatives are going to keep doing this over and over and over. It is not going to produce anything for them because the reality of the situation is that Canadians are looking for parliamentarians, especially in the world that we live in right now, to work together, to collaborate together, to come up with ideas together and certainly not to celebrate potential downfalls, which is what the Leader of the Opposition and his caucus are doing.

    Mr. Speaker, do members know what was amazing about the chief government whip's speech? He did not mention Canadians once. He did not talk about the 2.2 million people at a food bank. He did not talk about the food bank survey, which just came out, that gave them an F in food security, an F in employment and a D +in legislation.

    He did not talk about the things that real Canadians are talking about, which we bring to the floor of the House of Commons each and every day, talking about how Canadians are struggling under their policies. He made it about himself. He made it about the Liberals. He even talked about our leader answering questions from the media. It is amazing that he brought that up because his leader is in the witness protection program; he will not talk about the recession he created.

    Mr. Speaker, I know I am not supposed to address the presence or absence of members in the House, but that member listened to and sat here for my entire speech. After walking away from that, the only thing he could say was that I only talked about myself. I literally gave them political advice for eight straight minutes, talking about what they could do better. I am literally trying to help that member. He says that I am talking about myself. Of course I was talking about the struggles that Canadians are going through. What I was criticizing was the way that the Leader of the Opposition appears to be celebrating it.

    Mr. Speaker, in this and previous speeches, the member opposite boasted about using AI to analyze the Conservatives' motion, so I have a lot of questions.

    I was under the impression that people elected members of Parliament so they could do their own thinking about topics of debate in the House. Lately, elected Liberal MPs have been using algorithms from foreign platforms to analyze bills and opposition motions, and so has a government spokesperson.

    I would like to know just how common this has become on the other side of the House.

     Mr. Speaker, that is a nice try. I am probably one of the very few members of the House who does not read from or use a script or anything when I am speaking in the House. I literally spoke to the Speaker the whole time and read four sentences from something on my phone.

    We are about to go into question period, and every single question we hear, including from the Bloc, at least 70% or 80% of the time, will be a written-out question. I would love to know who writes out those questions for the Bloc or for the Conservatives.

    As far as it goes for me, I stand here, I speak my mind, and I speak it without notes or assistance.

    Mr. Speaker, does my colleague not find it surprising that the Conservatives describe Canada as a complete failure when millions of Canadians are working, investing, creating businesses and contributing every day to one of the strongest economies in the world?

    Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely correct. The reality is that we live in a world right now that we could not have predicted two years ago. We are responding to the uncertainties in that world and laying the framework and the groundwork to have a stronger economy that is not reliant on one particular trading partner but that can be diverse throughout the world. I have full confidence in the Prime Minister's ability to do that. I think it is glaringly obvious to Canadians that the alternative in the Leader of the Opposition just does not measure up.

    Mr. Speaker, the member talked about AI, which I want to talk about. We know that Canadians right now are facing rising costs and economic uncertainty. Financial fraud is even becoming a greater threat, and it is not being talked enough about today. Organized crime is using AI-generated scams for deepfakes, spoof calls and fake investment schemes to target people already under financial pressure.

    A record amount of fraud is impacting seniors in my riding who are losing their life savings. Families are being defrauded, and victims are often left to recover on their own. Protecting Canadians requires urgent government intervention: blocking scam calls, holding financial institutions and digital platforms accountable, ensuring that victims have access to support and recovery services, and growing the scale and urgency of this problem at a time when every dollar counts. When will the Liberals finally combat fraud using the measures they have, as a key tool in protecting Canadians' financial security and economic well-being?

    Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that this is something the government takes extremely seriously. This is the first government to have a Minister of Artificial Intelligence who is directly overseeing how we can safely implement artificial intelligence, which is inevitably going to make its way through society, and how we can safely do that in a way that protects Canadians but still sees the maximum potential that can come from this technology, including when that potential uses the opportunity to critique opposition motions from the Conservatives.

    Mr. Speaker, I want to note that I will be sharing my time with the member for Newmarket—Aurora.

    I rise today in the House to support the Conservative motion calling on the Prime Minister to take action to deal with the recession. I do so with a deep sense of responsibility, but also with great concern for the economic future of our country and that of our children and our grandchildren.

    The facts are unequivocal, stark and beyond dispute: Canada is in a recession. The motion tabled today makes that clear. It calls on the House to recognize that the Liberal Prime Minister has given Canada the only economy in recession in the G7. The current Prime Minister has the unenviable distinction of being the only leader among all our partners to have led his country down this path.

    While our international partners are tackling global challenges with resilience, Canada is sinking. The Liberals like to hide behind flowery words and their speeches. They call this situation a technical recession. Let us be very clear: There is absolutely nothing technical about this. There is nothing technical about a family having to choose between filling up the gas tank and buying groceries. There is nothing technical about the thousands of workers who have lost their jobs, while our country now has the second-highest unemployment rate in the G7, one-third higher than that of the United States. There is nothing technical about people seeing their dream of home ownership vanish forever because this government's policies have led us to the highest housing costs in the G7.

    What the Liberals call a technical anomaly is in reality a crisis of their own making, caused by their own decisions that are suffocating the public by creating the highest household debt in the G7. This is very bad news for Canada, for Canadians, for Quebeckers, and for the people of Beauce, as my colleague would proudly say. People from coast to coast to coast need a strong economy and a government that supports it, rather than weakened Liberals.

    Unfortunately, I am not surprised. No one on our side of the House is surprised. This recession is not just happenstance or the result of unpredictable international circumstances. It is the direct result of a decade of Liberal mismanagement.

    After 10 years of this government, Canada's federal debt has more than doubled, soaring from $616 billion to $1.473 trillion. This Liberal government has racked up more debt on Canada's credit card than all previous governments put together. The Liberals have flooded the economy with printed money, triggered an inflationary crisis and made life more expensive for everyone from coast to coast to coast. The economy is suffering, and Canadians are being left to foot the bill.

    Where is the Prime Minister's leadership while our economy is collapsing? What is his response to this major crisis affecting Canadian families? It is silence. The Prime Minister has not said a word about the recession. He refuses even to utter the word. He refuses to face reality. He refuses to answer Canadians' valid questions. Instead of presenting a serious economic plan, he prefers to look the other way and feign ignorance. This silence is an insult to workers who are losing their jobs and to families who are asking for only one thing: leadership. The Prime Minister has chosen to hide behind his ministers and stock phrases. His lack of public comment on the matter demonstrates a complete disconnect and a profound disregard for the economic hardship Canadians are facing.

    Let us talk about the Liberals' disastrous mismanagement and its devastating effects. While ordinary Canadians are being forced to stretch their own budgets and food banks across the country are seeing record demand, this government continues to squander taxpayers' money on misguided projects, crony contracts and inefficient bureaucracies. Public funds are being managed as though there were no obligation to be a good steward.

    Let us look at a few flagrant examples of this waste.

    First, let us consider the ArriveCAN scandal. This app was supposed to cost $80,000 and ended up costing $60 million.

    Worse still was the Cúram fiasco, which was supposed to cost $1.75 billion and ended up costing $6.6 billion. In the most recent update, the government added an additional $500 million for this system. That is a cost overrun of over $5 billion. Who is paying for that? It is Canadians. It is those who work hard every day. It will be our children and grandchildren who will pay for the Liberals' mismanagement. That is a national disgrace.

    The list goes on. I spoke about this next example already this week. A private company is leasing a plot of land from the provincial government for $13,500. That company then turned around and sublet the same land to the Liberal federal government for $20 million a year on a 10-year contract, for a total of $200 million. That is $200 million out of Canadians' pockets for a plot of land that is worth $13,500.

    Instead of providing real answers, the minister told me this week that he would love to arrange for me to meet with some astronauts. I will invite my friend from Beauce to come to the meeting. The minister's brilliant management tactic is to offer us a meeting with astronauts in order to explain how a $13,500 lease turned into $20 million in subletting fees every year for 10 years. Come on.

    The recession we are in today is no accident. It is the inevitable result of 10 years of structural deficits, stifling bureaucracy, punitive taxes and blatant contempt for sound fiscal management. Spending money does not lead to prosperity. Taxing people does not enrich this country.

    That is why our motion today is centred on the need for the House to call on the Liberal Prime Minister to immediately present a plan to reverse all the economic policies of the Liberal government that have given Canada the G7's worst economy.

    Canadians are fed up with their government asking them to tighten their belts while the Prime Minister stays silent and his ministers squander billions of dollars on a defective IT system. There is nothing that could justify wasting so much taxpayer money.

    Quebeckers and Canadians deserve a responsible government, one that respects every hard-earned dollar of its citizens. They deserve a government that understands that taxpayers' money does not belong to the state.

    That is why I support this motion with pride and determination. It is high time to cut Liberal waste, abolish Liberal taxes, restore a balanced budget, reverse these destructive policies and finally give Canadians back control of their economy, along with the hope and the chance to dream once again of a great and proud country.

    Mr. Speaker, I find my colleague's alarmist rhetoric a bit sad.

    I want to congratulate him. He is about to become a grandfather for the first time. I am a grandfather myself, twice over.

    However, for my part, I can look forward to a bright future for my grandchildren thanks to the decisions being made by the government. Just think of the Lévis region, where the Davie shipyard has started construction and will be providing jobs for people from Beauce.

    So I would like to know if he really sees this as alarmist rhetoric or if he will side with the government for the sake of his grandchildren's future.

    Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite, whom I like a lot, also has the privilege of being a grandfather. It is unacceptable that our children and grandchildren are already $44,000 in debt the day they are born because the Liberal government caused the deficit to balloon from around $700 billion to $1.4 trillion in the space of 10 years.

    Mr. Speaker, I rise to highlight Canada's leadership in strengthening global health systems.

     As UNITE chapter chair for North America, I had the honour of welcoming Dr. Ricardo Baptista Leite to Ottawa, who is president of UNITE. Alongside colleagues and leading health experts, we discussed how legislators can work together to advance innovation, preparedness and stronger outcomes internationally.

     UNITE is a global parliamentary network with more than 552 members across over 120 countries working with partners, such as the WHO and the United Nations, to promote fair and sustainable health systems and digital innovation. Canada has the expertise, the institutions and the credibility to help shape global solutions, from prevention and preparedness to supports for women, children and vulnerable communities.

    By working together with partners through UNITE, we can drive meaningful progress that reaches communities in every corner of the world.

     Mr. Speaker, this year, the Victoriaville CEGEP's Vulkins sports program is proudly celebrating its 55th anniversary.

    For over half a century, the Vulkins have embodied the pursuit of excellence, perseverance and teamwork. The CEGEP's dynamic teams and athletes have made Victoriaville famous across Quebec and far beyond.

     This anniversary is significant for me personally because my brother Carl and I were lucky enough to wear Vulkin purple. During our time as Vulkin athletes, we developed values, friendships and a sense of belonging that have stayed with us to this day.

    I want to pay tribute to all the generations of athletes, coaches, volunteers and staff members who built the big Vulkin family over the past 55 years. I also want to take this opportunity to invite all alumni and members of the public to the Vulkin reunion from October 9 to 11 and to the inauguration of the Boralex sports centre, which is happening around the same time. As they say in Victoriaville, once a Vulkin, always a Vulkin.

     Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Kaur Collective Foundation, a national organization advancing South Asian women's health equity and collective care.

     Founded and led by Jessie Kaur Lehail, Kaur Collective Foundation works at the intersection of women's health, culture and power. It leads health equity research and projects that improve access to culturally safe care for South Asian women. Kaur Collective Foundation also pushes government and institutions to see intimate partner violence, human trafficking and food security labour through a cultural lens.

     I ask all members to join me in thanking the Kaur Collective Foundation for its vital work supporting South Asian women.

    Mr. Speaker, there is a time of year on the Prairies when the alarm clock is mostly just for show because the work starts long before it rings.

     In Manitoba, the last few weeks have thrown just about everything at us, including snow, sleet and wind that tried to relocate about half of the province. The plan can be made, the equipment ready and the fields waiting, and they will still end up in a fight with the weather. Farmers do not get to press pause; only the weather can do that. That is farming. They repair equipment, seed, spray, fuel up, pray for rain, pray for sun and then get up the next morning and do it all over again. Through it all, farm families just keep going. That is just what they do.

     It may surprise some to learn that food does not magically show up on the grocery store shelves. It starts with families that take risks most people never see. It is parents, kids, siblings, grandparents and neighbours trying to pull together through long days and late nights for the kind of work that simply needs to get done. We thank the farm families who feed our country and keep rural Canada thriving. I wish them all a safe and prosperous season.

    Mr. Speaker, the government is aware of the challenges facing SMEs, particularly the issue of hiring well-trained employees. With the team Canada strong initiative, we want to address these challenges by offering grants to apprentices in Red Seal skilled trades and to the SMEs that hire them.

    That could include the bakery Le Duo Choc in Candiac, owned by two dynamic individuals, Katryne Deguire and Florent Lehmann, where apprentices would learn from the best, and for good reason. Florent and his employee, Félix Jeandot, were recently recognized at the Bakery Cup of Canada, winning the categories of best croissant and best baguette. Félix also won the award for outstanding assistant.

    I want to congratulate these two artisans. I wish Le Duo Choc bakery every success, as it will be proudly representing Canada at the Mondial du Pain championship to be held next year in France.

    Mr. Speaker, I rise with a heavy heart today to pay tribute to one of Oshawa's most devoted and generous community leaders, David Burns, who passed away this past Wednesday.

    Dave was the cherished husband of Christine for 62 years, a loving father and proud grandfather. Born in Halifax, he moved to Ontario to start a life grounded in faith, family and later politics.

    While his family will miss him terribly, he also leaves a deep void in Oshawa's tightly woven Conservative family. He was a long-time federal PC supporter who would become one of Oshawa's original Reformers, and in 2004, he became a founding member and director of the Oshawa Conservative Association, which he served continuously until just last year.

    From the nineties through to my own campaign last year, Dave was on the front lines of nearly every single Oshawa election. Known for his dry humour and quick wit, he was a passionate man who stood unapologetically for his principles. That is the man our team and I will miss and remember.

    I thank Dave for his unwavering service, humour and generosity. May God bless Christine and the entire Burns family.

     Mr. Speaker, today I rise with great pride to recognize an extraordinary group of young girls from my riding of St. Boniface—St. Vital, Team Bison. These five students recently competed in the 2026 Canada-Wide Science Fair in Edmonton. In their fourth consecutive year at the fair, they earned a bronze medal as well as several prestigious awards and scholarships.

     As someone who believes deeply in the potential of young people, I am especially proud of what they accomplished. Their curiosity, hard work and passion for discovery are inspiring. They are helping show the next generation of girls that they belong in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Their example reminds us of the importance of continuing to support and empower women and girls in these fields.

     I thank Team Bison for making our community proud. Their accomplishments inspire us, and I have no doubt this is only the beginning of what they will achieve. I congratulate them on this well-deserved achievement.

    Mr. Speaker, sometimes I think the Prime Minister is trolling us.

    What did he propose to protect the Jewish community? It was the Advisory Council on Rights, Equality, and Inclusion, with Omar Alghabra of all people. It is an insult. That is the Prime Minister's solution to synagogues being shot at and thugs harassing senior homes or marching in North York and chanting for intifada. Liberals love advisory councils. It is grade school level.

    Why not take some real steps? They could enforce the law, call the RCMP's integrated security enforcement team. This is a national security matter. The Liberals need to deport the 700 IRGC agents from Canada. So far, they have deported one. They could listen to the Association for the Chiefs of Police and pass my bill, Bill C-257, which would criminalize the wilful promotion of terrorism. Work with us and pass my bill.

    To the 400,000 Jewish Canadians, I am embarrassed by the Liberal government. The Conservative leader and all of my Conservative colleagues will not tolerate this nonsense. We will always protect Canada's Jews.

    Mr. Speaker, when we think of Warwick, we think of cheese. For world-renowned cheeses and culinary and regional specialties that set trends everywhere, look no further than the best cheese maker in Quebec, who can be found in Sainte-Élizabeth‑de‑Warwick.

    Jean Morin, the charming, generous and indispensable master and founder of Fromagerie du Presbytère, was named Artisan of the Year at the Gala des Lauriers de la gastronomie québécoise. This is yet another one of the many accolades received by Jean Morin and his team. He has an entire wall of them. It is thanks to him that we have the Louis d'Or, the Bleu d'Élizabeth, the Religieuse and the Taliah. All of these cheeses are a pure delight and pair well with a variety of Quebec wines.

    A lover of local foods, Jean also knows how to bring people together with his Friday events at the Presbytère, which draw tens of thousands of tourists for delicious picnics and great music. Jean embodies the very essence of one of Quebec's most beautiful and gastronomically rich regions.

    Bravo, Jean.

     Mr. Speaker, the Yukon has recently lost a treasure in the beloved and historic Westminster Hotel. I caught a last glimpse of this famous establishment, affectionately known as “The Pit”, while attending Dawson City's Gold Show just a couple of weeks ago.

    Though closed after flooding during December's deep freeze, the hotel still glowed with rose-coloured pride in the evening light of Dawson's early summer. Sadly, it was just the next morning that we watched this storied pink dame of Dawson give way to a fatal fire.

    Built during the gold rush in 1898, The Pit weathered repeated challenges from permafrost thaw, as it witnessed over a century of Dawson's countless colourful chapters, earning its reputation as Dawson's shared living room, informal post office and obligatory gathering place. My mind floods with memories soaked in the cheeky artwork of Halin de Repentigny, and I still hear the echoes of music of all brands, festive seasonal celebrations and the quiet murmur of chatting locals.

    An era has ended. I bid farewell to The Pit and give a fond nostalgic embrace to all in Dawson City.

    Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Prime Minister's latest report card is out. Canada is the only G7 country with a leader who took its economy into a recession.

    Canada's economy declined in the last two quarters and contracted in three of the last four quarters. There were 112,000 jobs lost in just three months and 46,000 more Canadians are jobless than when the Prime Minister took office. Business investment fell for the fifth straight quarter and $109 billion in investment has fled Canada since he took office.

    Canadian households now carry the highest debt in the G7, the least affordable housing in the G7, the highest food inflation in the G7, the lowest investment per worker in the G7 and the second-highest unemployment in the G7. Consumer insolvencies are up 19%, 1.5 million Canadians missed a debt payment in just three months and mortgage delinquencies are up 32%. Nationally, food bank visits have doubled, one in four Canadians is food-insecure and households pay 120% of their income on rent and food.

    Canadians do not need more bureaucracies and slush funds for Liberal insiders. Conservatives will end inflationary deficits, repeal Liberal antidevelopment laws, cut red tape and bring home jobs, investment and hope.

    Mr. Speaker, on the weekend, the Pakistani community in Canada lost a giant with the passing of Khalid Usman, and for me, he was Khalid Bhai. A friend and mentor to so many, he always had a smile on his face and never lost his sense of humour.

    A Markham city councillor for 14 years, he lived a life of public service and gave back to the community in so many ways. As a dedicated philanthropist, he raised millions for charity, including Markham Stouffville Hospital and Shaukat Khanum, a cancer hospital in Pakistan.

    For Canadians of Pakistani origin, he was a trailblazer, showing us what a career and a life dedicated to building a better Canada could be. I appreciated his encouragement and support from the earliest days of my career.

    My prayers are with his wife, Dr. Abida Khalid, his three daughters, Hina, Rabia and Maria, his grandchildren and all the extended family members, and all those whose lives he touched.

    May Allah grant him the highest place in Jannah.

     Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un.

    Mr. Speaker, while the current Prime Minister is the only G7 leader to take his country into a recession, the consequences are felt by Canadians from coast to coast. Food Banks Canada just released its poverty report card for 2026, and it shows that one in four Canadians is food-insecure and food bank visits have doubled since 2020. These are not just stats; these are real people with real stories.

    Parents call my office saying that they are giving up meals in order to make sure that their kids have enough to eat, but the Prime Minister refuses to take responsibility. Hard-working families cannot get ahead when they are left carrying the cost of Liberal waste, runaway spending and failed policies. Canadians cannot afford more of the same. They deserve a government that will end inflationary spending, repeal antidevelopment laws and cut excessive red tape.

    We Conservatives will unleash Canada's economic potential. We will ensure Canadians keep more of their hard-earned dollars and we will build a more prosperous future for generations to come. Canadians do not need a government that stands in their way. They need one that is going to help them get ahead.

    Mr. Speaker, tomorrow is Red Shirt Day for Accessibility. In recent weeks, both in my riding of University—Rosedale and in the work of the Standing Committee on Finance, we have heard from Canadians with disabilities and the organizations that support them.

    Too many Canadians with disabilities live in poverty. I was so pleased to see our government announce important improvements to the disability tax credit and to join the Secretary of State for the Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions at Community Living Toronto, an extraordinary organization in my riding, to highlight how we are simplifying the application process and making it easier for eligible Canadians to access supports.

    Along with Canada's disability benefit, these measures represent meaningful progress. I look forward to helping build on this work because I know our government is committed to a more inclusive and accessible Canada.

    Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has made Canada the only G7 country in a recession. Even though the other countries face the same global challenges and tariffs, Canada's economy shrunk 75% of his term, with the lowest investment per worker in the G7. That is less opportunity and more stress for Canadians who cannot afford it. A year in, almost 46,000 more Canadians are jobless, household savings are at their lowest and millions of Canadians, especially kids, visit food banks just to get by.

    These are predictable results with deficits double Trudeau's, higher carbon taxes and a decade of top-down “Ottawa knows best” chaos and division. So much for the elbows-up man with a plan for Canada. Canadians get photo ops, discussion papers and a self-identified European PM who just said he wants to make America great again.

    Conservatives will cut taxes and inflationary spending, slash big bureaucrat bonuses and corporate cronyism and axe antidevelopment laws and red tape that block building to unleash Canada's economy so Canadians can hope to thrive, not just survive.

    Mr. Speaker, May was Prader-Willi Syndrome Awareness Month, a time to recognize individuals and families across Canada living with the rare genetic disorder that requires lifelong medical, behavioural and social support. Last Wednesday, families from across the country gathered on Parliament Hill for FPWR Canada's first day on the Hill, raising awareness and advocating for stronger support, timely access to therapies and more inclusive policies for Canadians living with rare diseases.

    This cause is especially meaningful to me, because one of those remarkable children is Olivier, my very own nephew. Like so many families, ours has witnessed both the incredible resilience of individuals living with Prader-Willi syndrome and the daily challenges they face. These families are not asking for sympathy; they are asking for equity, dignity and the opportunity for loved ones to live full lives.

    I want to thank FPWR Canada and the families, caregivers, researchers and advocates who continue to push for progress and bring hope for rare disease communities across Canada.

    Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Liberal Prime Minister. Five days after learning that Canada was the only G7 country in recession, the Prime Minister finally decided to answer a question from the media and offer fresh excuses. He says the reason we are in a recession is that immigration is too low and that per capita GDP is actually very good. Per capita GDP has risen by 0.2%.

    Is the Prime Minister expecting a parade for that?

    Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister answers questions rather than insulting the media. That is the first point.

    The second point is that I think it is important to understand that our plan is working. Our non-U.S. exports are on the rise; in fact, they are doubling. The other point is that wages have consistently outpaced inflation. Furthermore, we can see that Canada is the most attractive destination in the G7 for foreign investment.

    It is clear that our plan is working.

    Mr. Speaker, the per capita GDP growth rate is about as high as the Prime Minister's question period attendance rate. He should be answering questions about the fact that, under his leadership, Canada is the only G7 country to be in recession. Today, he said that investment in Canada has increased over the last two quarters. Let us look at the Statistics Canada report.

    In the first quarter of 2026, business capital investment fell by another 0.7%, marking a fifth consecutive decline.

    Why is the Prime Minister spreading misinformation?

    Mr. Speaker, we have a plan, but we are also facing headwinds. It is clear that with the tariff threats, wars in the Middle East and wars in Europe, Canada is facing headwinds, but we have a plan.

    Our plan is working. We have a defence plan to spend money here. We have a plan for industry and, indeed, businesses are purchasing more equipment and materials. We have a plan for major projects.

    The real question is why does the Leader of the Opposition seem so happy to gloat over the fact that Canada is facing headwinds? Why is he not presenting his own plan?

     Mr. Speaker, this question is for the Prime Minister. We do not need more excuses. He has delivered the only recession in the G7. Mexico is not in recession. It is just as integrated with the United States and shares a border with that country. The Prime Minister finally emerged to take media questions on his recession today, and he blamed it on the fact that immigration, as he claims, is not high enough and that per capita GDP is actually not so bad. The only problem is that, in the last year, per capita GDP has only grown by 0.2%.

    Does he really expect a parade for 0.2%?

    Mr. Speaker, all Canadians, except for the Leader of the Opposition, understand that we have the most integrated economy with the Americans in the world. They understand our economy continues to show resilience in the face of illegal and unjustified tariffs. They understand we are facing two global economy-destroying wars. Canadians want us to work to build, not to talk down, Canada. That is why we are building nuclear. That is why we are building transmission. That is why we are building ports. That is why we are building roads. We can keep going. They should stop talking us down.

    Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are building a recession, and they are building excuses. The fact is that all other G7 countries face tariffs and global wars. Mexico is just as, if not more, integrated with the United States; and none of those other countries are in a recession. Only the Liberal Prime Minister has delivered that. After five days, he finally emerged to talk to the media, after hiding from answering questions, and blamed the recession on the fact that immigration is not high enough. Per capita GDP has increased by 0.2%.

    Why the—

    The hon. Minister of National Defence.

     Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has some kind of phony and artificial narrative. I do not know where he is drawing this from. He picks up pieces of information. He tries to weave them together. What is interesting is that he has no plan. He has nothing to say. The last time he had a plan, he told Canadians to go invest in cryptocurrency. For God's sake, let us take a look at where that is at.

    Why does the Leader of the Opposition not get up and give us a real plan, and instead of running down this incredible country, build this country forward and build it up?

    Mr. Speaker, the question was for the Liberal Prime Minister. The Prime Minister said:

    This is people's lives.

    The Prime Minister caused this painful recession. Will he show up, stand up and own up?

    Mr. Speaker, do members know what Canadians are excited about? Canadians are excited about building up this country, building Canada strong. Whether it is things like a new NORAD base, a new wind project, mining projects in my neck of the woods in northern Ontario, new ports, or new opportunities for people to participate in the skilled trades, the Conservatives talk down every opportunity Canadians have.

    Canadian workers are tired of being undermined in the House. They know we have their back. They know we are building big, and they are going to do it with us.

     Mr. Speaker, yes, Canadian workers are tired. They are tired of working six days a week and not being able to afford their rent. They are tired of showing up at the grocery store and having to hand products back at the checkout because they cannot afford to pay for them. They are tired of making their way over to the food bank and finding that the food bank is empty. They are tired of a Prime Minister who causes this recession and then does not have the courage or the decency to show up in the House of Commons and take ownership of—

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

     I was expecting that on the last question, because now I cannot remove a question from the hon. Leader of the Opposition.

    The hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs has the floor.

     Mr. Speaker, last year, Canadian exports to non-U.S. markets grew by more than 17%. Canada has the fastest-growing economy in the G7, this year and next. In the first four months of this year alone, we secured more than $10 billion in commercial deals for Canadian businesses.

    Speaking of infrastructure investments, there is Ksi Lisims, Mackenzie Valley Highway and Contrecoeur. Canada was ranked the world's most attractive destination for foreign direct investment. There is a reason: We are building Canada—

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

    Order. The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly.

    Mr. Speaker, we were promised that the issue of tariffs and trade would be fixed in June 2025. Clearly, that did not work out. It is not the Prime Minister's fault. It is Donald Trump's fault. One year of dithering later, here we are again, and now the Prime Minister wants a 16-year agreement. I agree, that is fine with me, but it will certainly take a little longer than two weeks.

    In the meantime, will the government help SMEs with a wage subsidy that would help retain expertise and jobs in Quebec?

    Mr. Speaker, it goes without saying that we are there for our businesses, especially our SMEs. We are there for businesses in Quebec and across Canada. In fact, just one month ago, we announced some new funding: $1.5 billion for the steel, aluminum and copper sectors. I have been in contact with a number of stakeholders in Quebec and across Canada. They are very grateful for our help.

    In the meantime, while the Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade is in Washington, we will be there, not just for any agreement, but for a good agreement for Canadians.

    Mr. Speaker, in all of this, there is no provision for what virtually everyone in the field is asking for: a wage subsidy program that would help maintain employment relationships, preserve expertise within companies, and prevent foreign workers with specialized skills from being sent home. There is nothing on this for these companies.

    In the meantime, our forestry industry is in trouble and our sawmills are closing.

    Will the government implement the cost-free solution proposed by the forestry industry to resume lumber exports?

    Mr. Speaker, obviously, we will be there for our forestry industry, just as we have been there for the aluminum, auto and steel sectors. We are indeed facing headwinds on the trade front with the United States, but we will always be there for the people. In fact, the Prime Minister will be in Quebec later today to drum up billions and billions of dollars in infrastructure investments for communities both small and large across Quebec.

    We will always be there for Quebeckers and for the communities.

    Mr. Speaker, the tariff crisis has just forced Matawinie's biggest employer to seek protection under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The Saint-Michel sawmill and its 250 jobs need immediate, debt-free liquidity, otherwise it is all over. The Bloc Québécois warned the government that its support measures for the forestry sector would not be enough. Ottawa needs to buy back 50% of the countervailing and anti-dumping duties paid by our companies. This measure would cost the government nothing, but it could save businesses like the Saint-Michel sawmill.

    When will the government understand that urgent action is needed?

    Mr. Speaker, of course our thoughts are with the workers in Saint-Michel-des-Saints because we know that this is a very difficult time for the forest products sector across the country.

    That is also why we will be there for them. We currently have a plan for steel, aluminum and copper, which is very beneficial under the circumstances, knowing, of course, that unjustified and unjustifiable tariffs are being imposed on these sectors. However, the Minister of Natural Resources and I are working to ensure that these BDC products can also be made available to the forestry sector.

    I look forward to working with my colleague on this because we need to support communities across the country.

     Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wants Canadians to believe that this recession is the fault of the world. Tariffs, energy prices and global uncertainty are all convenient Liberal excuses. However, every nation in the G7 face those same conditions, yet Canada alone has fallen into a recession. Twenty billion dollars in net investment has fled this country under his watch. That is a failure of Liberal economic policy.

    If the world is to blame, then why is Canada the only G7 country in a recession?

    Mr. Speaker, clearly the Conservative leader is missing in action again when it comes to anything constructive with respect to the economy. Where is he? Where is he today with anything constructive?

    Canadians do not want political theatre. They want a government that is serious about this economy. We are going to diversify our trade, we are going to build major projects, and we are going to invest in unions and workers. On this side of the House, we are serious about building an economy, the strongest economy in the G7. The Conservative leader is missing in action again.

    Let us try to stay away from metaphors.

    The hon. member for Newmarket—Aurora.

    Mr. Speaker, the member can spin, deflect and dress up this issue however he likes, but why should Canadians believe that the Liberal government's promises about the future are true, when the numbers today prove that the Liberals cannot manage the present?

    Canada is the only G7 country in a recession. The Prime Minister told Canadians that we have the best deal in the world with the U.S. Oil prices are surging. Canada should be thriving. Instead, our economy has contracted three out of the last four quarters.

    I will ask again, if the world is to blame, then why—

     The hon. secretary of state for financial institutions.

     Mr. Speaker, I have a news flash for the leader and the party opposite. We are in a trade war. We are facing economic headwinds. Canadians do not want the political theatre that the leader loves. Listen to the chief economist of Scotiabank, who characterized his behaviour as “irresponsible”.

     On this side of the House, we are going to build an economy for all Canadians. We are going to invest in infrastructure, in defence and in housing, in major projects. We will build Canada strong, a Canada for everyone. The opposition leader is missing in action. Where is he?

    I know that people are being very clever, but let us try not to be.

    The hon. member for Terra Nova—The Peninsulas.

     Mr. Speaker, a recession is two consecutive quarters of economic decline. The Prime Minister has had three of his four quarters in decline. That puts Canada as the only G7 country in recession. While the Liberals are in denial, the facts do not lie. There are more small businesses in Canada closing than opening. More than half of small business owners do not recommend opening a business.

    When will the Liberals at least admit that their policies put Canada into a recession?

     Mr. Speaker, I want to celebrate the apprenticeship program, a program that is focused on getting young people trained to Red Seal status, with support at every step along that process.

    We are building the economy with almost $1 billion for small craft harbours and support for our rural communities, as well as an economic boost for communities.

    That is what Canadians expect, and that is what we are delivering.

     Mr. Speaker, I do not think those words are very comforting to the apprentices or to the 112,000 people who lost their job in the past three months. Mortgage defaults are growing year over year. Canadian households have the highest debt in the G7. Insolvencies hit their highest level since 2009. Twenty billion dollars has fled this country.

     How much more data does the government need before it realizes that whatever the Prime Minister is pretending to do is not working?

    Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the member opposite from Newfoundland and Labrador that we are working closely with the Conservative provincial government to build the province together, with Bay du Nord and with $8 billion for 5 Wing Goose Bay to expand the capacity of the base, but also, the support goes out into the broader region.

    The work continues with housing initiatives. On and on it goes. There was an announcement today from the Finance Minister in Newfoundland and Labrador.

    That is what Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and Canadians, expect us to do. That is what we are doing. We are laser focused, and we—

     The hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South.

     Mr. Speaker, it was not that long ago that the Prime Minister got up and said he was the grand economist who would turn things around, the guy we could go to in a crisis. Well, here we are: Canada is the only G7 country in a recession, and where is he? He is nowhere to be found. He ran from a reporter who asked about it. He does not rise in the House of Commons to speak to it, while Canadians are suffering, struggling and paying the price.

    When will the Prime Minister admit that Canada is in a recession and that he is the one to blame?

    Mr. Speaker, I think it is time to get serious. I think members of the opposition and Canadians know that we are in very uncertain economic times and that we are engaged in a trade war that is not of our making. That is why the Prime Minister and the government have a plan. That is why we are so focused on diversifying our trade and engaging in free trade agreements with countries around the world. That is why we are selling uranium to India. That is why we are selling planes to Malaysia and selling canola to China.

    Our plan is working. We will keep working hard to make sure we are creating good-paying jobs for all Canadians.

     Mr. Speaker, we are never going to get to net zero with that level of gaslighting.

    My goodness, the London economic region, which includes Elgin and St. Thomas, has the highest unemployment rate in Canada, at 9.2%, with 1,800 jobs lost in April. Does he expect me to go to my constituents and say, “Don't worry. You can sell all that uranium you've been working on”?

     Families are struggling. Families are suffering. The government keeps spending more and more money and will not even acknowledge the consequences of its actions. When is it going to get serious and account for the fact that it has put Canada into a recession, the only country in the G7 to be there?

    Mr. Speaker, the members opposite can be as gleeful and as jovial as they want, but Canadians know that this is a very serious moment for our country. That is why they require serious leadership. That is why they have elected a leader and a party that have a plan to diversify our economy. We not only will engage with the United States and Mexico to get the best deal possible for our country, but we will also build bridges and new partnerships around the world with China, India, Southeast Asia and Mercosur.

    That is where our focus is and we will not stop until we create good-paying jobs for all Canadians.

    Mr. Speaker, members should not believe the Liberals when they say that we have the fastest-growing economy in the G7. We are the only one in a recession. The Liberals should try telling that to the mom skipping meals so her children will not. They should tell that to the grandma at the food bank who is just trying to put Sunday dinner on the table. They should tell that to the student whose future has been stolen. There are 112,000 jobs gone, a trillion dollars of investment gone and $670 billion in generational jobs gone. It is not wars. It is not tariffs. It is the Prime Minister's record.

    Which Liberal will get up to defend that?

     Mr. Speaker, we are proud to stand up for our record every day in this House of Commons because the member knows very well that we are in the middle of a trade war. This country is facing headwinds, but we have a plan. Canada is building, from LNG in B.C. to critical minerals in the Prairies, from nuclear and transit in Ontario to ports and mining in Quebec and offshore energy in Atlantic Canada.

    This is how we create good jobs, great opportunities in the skilled trades and good union jobs. We are building a Canada strong for all.

     Mr. Speaker, the Liberals just keep backtracking on the fight against climate change, to the point where the outgoing MP for Laurier—Sainte-Marie has come to the worst possible conclusion.

    Speaking on QUB radio, he said: “We're going to see that, with the backtracking there's been this year, the United States under Donald Trump is doing more to tackle climate change than Canada is.” By the end of the year, he believes that Donald Trump's record will be better than that of the green banker. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister just shrugs his shoulders and says that is just how it is.

    How can the Liberals defend that?

    Mr. Speaker, we stand by every position we take because we know that, under the current circumstances, these are the best choices we can make to ensure our economic independence as well as the survival of our planet.

    Our nature plan will have a significant impact on biodiversity, but also on climate change. The methane regulations will have a major impact on reducing pollution from the fossil fuel industry. The EV strategy and the electrification strategy are a set of measures that ensure Canadians—

    The hon. member for Repentigny.

    Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, in committee, the Liberals proved that they did not calculate how all their backtracking is affecting the achievement of their climate targets.

    They do not have the numbers. The so-called “green banker” did not even take the time to calculate the harm this backtracking would cause. The outgoing member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie believes that, when we look at these numbers, we will see that Canada's record will be worse than the United States' record under Donald Trump.

    If the minister does not agree with him, it is simple; all she has to do is show numbers that contradict him. When will we—

    The hon. Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature.

    Mr. Speaker, since the Bloc Québécois is interested in numbers, I want to talk about a few numbers.

    We strengthened the methane regulations, which represents a reduction of 400 megatonnes. If he wants to talk about what we have done for the climate and for climate action internationally, Canada is a leader with our international action plan to support climate action. If he wants to talk about what we are doing for EVs, we are seeing a huge increase in EV sales because our government has made changes. We are continuing to do the work.

    Mr. Speaker, here is a sad reality: Canada is the only G7 country in a recession. The Liberals have been racking up deficits for 10 years. Since they took office, the debt has risen from $700 billion to $1.4 trillion. They are engaging in inflationary spending. There have been 10 years of economic mismanagement. The result is clear, and the facts are undeniable: 112,000 Canadians have lost their jobs over the past three months. Many Canadians are struggling to pay their mortgages and buy groceries. Two million Canadians visit food banks every month—

    The hon. Secretary of State for Children and Youth.

    Mr. Speaker, the government has a plan to build a strong, resilient economy. We see this in the 8,000 jobs in Contrecœur and in the 1,000 jobs at Nouveau Monde Graphite in Matawinie. In addition, this Friday, 12 million Canadians will receive the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. This is a significant top-up payment to help families cope with the cost of living. In addition, we have reduced the gas tax.

    We are here to build the future and a strong economy for all while supporting Canadians and families across the country.

    Mr. Speaker, all G7 countries are facing the same challenges, yet Canada has the second-highest unemployment rate among them.

    While Canadians are tightening their belts in the midst of a recession, the Liberals' wasteful spending is out of control. Just look at Cúram. The budgeted amount was $1.75 billion but the actual cost is $6.6 billion, which is a deficit of $5 billion. What about the plot of land that was rented for $13,500 a year, for which the Liberal government is paying $20 million a year?

    Why is the Prime Minister asking Canadians to make sacrifices while the government is spending money like there is no tomorrow?

    Mr. Speaker, we continue to be there for Canadian families. We are investing in a school food program to help families with the cost of groceries. That represents over $800 for a family that is benefiting from this program.

    We also have a dental care program that is helping families and Canadians with the cost of living. I want to note that, in the riding of my colleague who asked the question, over 32,000 residents benefit from this dental care program. The opposition members voted against this program. This is the type of support we are giving Canadians by being there for them right now.

    Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister is the only G7 leader to have driven his economy into a recession. This recession is the result of a lack of leadership, unchecked spending and high taxes, which are causing record job losses. Over the past 360 days, GDP has fallen by 0.6%, yet Brookfield has surged by 19.56%. While the Prime Minister and his friends at Brookfield are getting richer, the people of Beauce are getting poorer.

    Will the Liberal Prime Minister show some leadership and take this crisis seriously?

    Mr. Speaker, we always take what is happening in Canada seriously. What is not serious is the Conservatives' rhetoric. For 10 years, they have been talking about productivity. Now, in the last quarter, productivity is rising, and they are saying absolutely nothing. That is hypocrisy, plain and simple.

    Mr. Speaker, all G7 countries are facing the same challenges, yet the Liberals are the only ones who have led the Canadian economy into recession. The Liberals are squandering taxpayers' money without a second thought.

    Let me give some examples. The budget for ArriveCAN was $80,000; the actual cost was $60 million. The budget for Cúram was $1.75 billion; the actual cost was $6.6 billion. Here is the icing on the cake: They spent $180,000 on food for just three flights for our Prime Minister. What is the big deal? It is free.

    When will the Prime Minister start managing Canadians' money properly?

    Mr. Speaker, let me give him a concrete example: ensuring the long-term future of the school meals program for children. Is he for or against it? I would like to hear his answer.

    Mr. Speaker, Canada is the only G7 country in a recession. Yesterday, my colleague on the other side responded by trying to convince us that their approach is working. She said, “It is working.” However, a tremendous number of people back home are telling me that they feel a lump in their throat when they get to the supermarket checkout, praying that the payment will go through, because they are not sure there is enough money in their account.

    How can she say it is working when a rich country like Canada is forced to rely on food banks to feed its people?

    Mr. Speaker, yes, it is working. It is working so well that, when I meet with people in my riding, they know that we are working hard to tackle the extremely difficult circumstances faced by my esteemed colleague's constituents. They know that the Canada groceries and essentials benefit is a decision we have made and that it is working for them. It is a decision that the Conservatives did not support.

    When we support the economy through investment, the Conservatives are nowhere to be seen. They vote against it. Our constituents know that our approach is serious and that it will work.

    Mr. Speaker, do members know what the difference is between this side of the House and that side of the House? Conservatives wake up hoping for bad economic news that they can use to repeat pithy slogans, fire off fundraising emails and talk down Canadian industries and Canadian workers. On this side of the House, we wake up knowing that Canadians are counting on us to build a stronger, more competitive and more affordable economy. That is exactly what we are doing.

     Can the Secretary of State for Financial Institutions update this House on how Canadian innovators, entrepreneurs and workers are helping us navigate a rapidly changing world?

    Mr. Speaker, the last thing Canadians need right now is political theatre, and that is all they get from the leader of the Conservative Party, political theatre and empty parking lot press conferences.

     We have a plan. We are going to diversify trade relationships. We are supercharging major projects. We are investing in workers. The plan is working, the GDP is growing and we are attracting federal direct investment at a pace not seen in decades. That is good news for Canadians and bad news for Conservatives.

     Mr. Speaker, Canada is now the only G7 country in a recession, and Canadians are facing the real consequences of that reality. Demand at food banks continues to surge across the country, and Food Banks Canada is now reporting that millions of Canadians are facing historic levels of food insecurity. The fact is, one in four Canadians is now food-insecure.

     If the Prime Minister says this recession is being driven by global energy markets and tariffs, why is Canada the only G7 country in a recession?

     Mr. Speaker, it is time that we celebrate Canada. We have more good news. Canadian canola sales continue moving to supply the world, Canadian potash is needed everywhere and Canada will deliver. Canadian uranium sales to India are steady, and Canadian agribusiness is booming. We will continue doing what Canada needs.

     We will stand up for our industries impacted by tariffs. We will protect our workers. We will stand up for our sovereignty. We have a job to do, and we will get it done.

     Mr. Speaker, unlike that secretary of state, Canadians do not get to ignore the reality of the recession caused by the Liberal government's terrible policies.

     Food Banks Canada is reporting that lower-income households are spending more than 100% of their income on basic essentials. Every other G7 country is facing the same global pressures, yet Canada is the only one in a recession.

    Why are Canadians paying the price for this government's economic failures, while every other G7 country has avoided recession?

     Mr. Speaker, it is very important that we protect and defend our country. All we hear from the Conservatives is negative. They need to stop talking down our country and start backing up Canada. The rest of Canada is doing that. We have seen, in Saskatchewan, for 10 long years, that those Conservative MPs sat on their hands, doing nothing. That is why the people of Saskatchewan are angry.

     At the end of the day, we come to Ottawa to work; the Conservatives have done nothing in 10 years. I have seen this Liberal government move more things in one year than in their 10 years.

     Mr. Speaker, Canada is now the only G7 economy in a recession.

     It might be big news to the bankers and bureaucrats in Ottawa, but in my community, the warning lights have been flashing for months. The Cambridge Food Bank reports that hundreds of people with full-time jobs are using their services every month.

     These Liberals lecture hungry people about so-called global factors, but France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the U.K. all face tariff pressures from the U.S. and none of them are in a recession, just Canada. If our recession was about tariffs, war and oil prices, then why is it that Canada is the only G7 economy in a recession right now?

     Mr. Speaker, we recognize that Canadians are facing challenging times. That is why our government is providing real relief for Canadians. Through the national school food program, we are feeding 400,000 kids healthy meals at school.

    I have good news. On Friday, Canadians are going to get the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. An average family of four will receive $1,900. This is real relief being provided to Canadians right now.

     Mr. Speaker, that minister's cherry-picking skills would put even the best fruit farmer to shame.

    Over 100,000 jobs have been lost since the beginning of the year, and business investment has declined for five straight quarters, but the Liberal government pretends that everything is fine. Families in my community have real questions about how they are going to make ends meet, put food on the table or just keep their jobs. The Liberal Prime Minister's response is to go into hiding. He has been dodging the cameras and our questions for five days.

    Now that we have a real economic crisis, why is the Liberal Prime Minister missing in action, and why is Canada the only G7 country in a recession?

     Mr. Speaker, I will point out that the member is from the province of Ontario and continues to vote against supports and affordability to help Canadians.

    Let us talk about Ontario. More than four million people have received the GST rebate, delivering $2.2 billion to Ontarians. We are also helping first-time homebuyers. In the province of Ontario, there is an average of savings of up to $200,000 for first-time homebuyers. We are going to help them with affordability. We are going to help them during these challenging times. That is how we are going to grow Canada strong.

    Mr. Speaker, I do not know if I am in the House of Commons or the twilight zone. Last Thursday, the Liberal Prime Minister went around telling everyone that we have the second-fastest growing economy in the G7, but on Friday, Statistics Canada reported that our economy shrank in two consecutive quarters. We are in a recession. Canada is the only G7 country in a recession.

    Today, Liberals are blaming tariffs and global conflicts, but if that is the case, why is no other G7 country facing the same headwinds in a recession?

    Mr. Speaker, only the Conservatives think that global factors such as wars, climate change and tariffs are a conspiracy theory. They are not a conspiracy theory. They do have an impact on our local economy.

    What is our government doing? We are responding in ways that help Canadians, like the groceries and essentials benefit, which that member from Hamilton East—Stoney Creek voted against. How about the 20,000 people in his riding who rely on the Canada child benefit? He voted against that, too.

    I suppose I will congratulate the leader of the Conservatives on one thing. He has managed to whip all those Conservatives up to ask only four questions this entire question period. At least they are consistent.

    Mr. Speaker, let me repeat to that out-of-touch Liberal, Canada is the only G7 country in a recession. That member has failed Canada. The Liberals have failed Canada. Parents in Hamilton want job security, a tariff deal and paycheques that can afford groceries. The Stoney Creek Community Food Bank is serving over 120 families per week. The Food Banks Canada report card came out yesterday, and the Liberals got a D+.

    When will the Liberals stop gaslighting Canadians and start working for Canadians?

    Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House, we are busy making jobs happen in Hamilton East—Stoney Creek while that member votes against policies that support families in his riding, like the Canada child benefit, dental and the groceries and essentials benefit.

    That member is cherry-picking things out of the groceries and essentials benefit and from Food Banks Canada. He should be ashamed of himself. We are following the instructions from Food Banks Canada. We are putting on the record that we are here to help families with jobs and with the groceries and essentials benefit. All the Conservatives can do is read the same tired speeches from their leader into the record over and over again, while we are busy, on this side, helping Canadians.