“Canadians chose our leader because he has strong economic experience to deal with issues like trade and tariffs. Canada needs a national investment fund to support our economy and our people. I want to know why the Conservative leader does not support this.”

“Mr. Speaker, a year ago, Canadians had the opportunity to decide. It was a decision that was made based on how the economy was doing. People were genuinely concerned about Trump, tariffs and trade. They were concerned about the economy and affordability. They looked at the leader of the Conservative Party and contrasted him with the leader of the Liberal Party, who had been appointed as the Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Governor of the Bank of England, and who has had an impeccable career dealing with economic measures. The Canada Strong fund, a national sovereign wealth fund, is something that Canada needs. It is something Canadians will support, because they understand the necessity of supporting Canada’s economy, and at the same time, supporting Canadians. Why does the leader of the Conservative Party not support a government that invests in Canada and invests in Canadians?”

“I disagree with the member's doubt about a sovereign wealth fund. In the past, Canadians bought war bonds to invest in the country's future. This fund gives Canadians another good chance to invest in our growth.”

“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite’s speech, but obviously I do not share his pessimism about the sovereign wealth fund. Generations ago we had examples with victory bonds, with war bonds. We have had examples of Canadians stepping up, especially at times when Canada’s sovereignty has been tested, throughout our history, when Canadians want to participate in investing in the future that they want to build for this country. Would the member not say that this is a welcome opportunity for Canadians to be able to participate in the prosperity and growth that the government is moving forward on?”

“Our government's economic plan is working. We are starting a $25-billion national wealth fund to invest in energy, minerals, farming, and infrastructure. Everyday Canadians will be able to invest in this fund too, so everyone can share in the profits.”

“Mr. Speaker, it will come as no surprise that I do not share the views and pessimism coming from the Conservative leader in the House. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today about the sovereign wealth fund that our Prime Minister and Minister of Finance announced just before the spring economic update. There is no doubt that Canada’s economy is at a very important moment, a hinge moment. Around the world, countries are competing for investment, talent and opportunity. Supply chains are shifting dramatically, global energy systems are evolving quickly, and technological change is accelerating, especially with the AI revolution. In this environment, economic strength does not happen by accident. It is built deliberately through smart policy, strong partnerships and a clear focus on long-term growth. Our government has been focused on what we can control. There are many things we cannot control, but there are many that we can. Building a strong, sustainable and inclusive economy is within our control, an economy that is backed by an ambitious plan to help enable $1 trillion in total investment across Canada over the next five years. That plan is well under way. We saw in the spring economic update quite a large number of signs of progress. As we build a stronger Canada, we must ensure that all Canadians can benefit, now and for generations to come. The spring economic update 2026 builds on the momentum of budget 2025 with strategic investments that support productivity, innovation, growth and competitiveness, and that position Canada for long-term prosperity. This means delivering generational infrastructure and nation-building projects, like the 21 projects listed, with $125 billion in new investment and over 60,000 jobs. It also means diversifying Canada’s trade. We have seen 20 new trade and security agreements signed and a 38% increase in non-U.S. trade over the short term, or a time frame of just about eight months. We are also supporting workers and young people. In the spring economic update, we see an initiative to recruit, train and hire 80,000 to 100,000 more skilled trade workers. On building more homes, we are accelerating $7 billion in low-cost financing for rental apartment construction. It also means protecting the safety and security of Canadians. We see the creation of the financial crimes agency, and security for places of worship, in the spring economic update. These are very important initiatives. We are also investing in strong communities. We see sports, from playground to podium. We see small craft harbours, mostly in Atlantic Canada but recognizing that they are all across our coastal communities and very important to building strong communities. The government is making these key investments while maintaining Canada’s strong fiscal stewardship, which has positioned Canada, according to the International Monetary Fund, to have the second-fastest projected growth in the G7 and the strongest fiscal position in the G7. Let me repeat that. We have the strongest fiscal position in the G7, according to the International Monetary Fund. That is good news. I know Conservatives do not like to hear that, but it is good news for Canada and certainly a sign that we are building prosperity from a position of strength. One of the measures announced in the spring economic update was the creation of the Canada Strong fund, Canada’s first sovereign wealth fund. Sovereign wealth funds are not just financial tools but nation-building investments in the future of a country. They represent a country’s belief in its own future. They take today’s revenues, often generated from hard-won economic strength, and invest them with purpose, discipline and a long-term view. Instead of spending everything in the moment, sovereign wealth funds build enduring assets that can support generations to come. This is the intention of the Canada Strong fund. It will do exactly that. It will help more Canadians be able to participate in the generational wealth building that we are achieving together. Through an initial federal contribution of $25 billion, the fund will strategically invest, alongside the private sector and based on commercial terms, in Canadian projects and companies driving our economic transformation. This includes projects in clean and conventional energy, critical minerals, agriculture and the infrastructure that we need in this country. The returns will be reinvested to grow the Canada Strong fund, so it will be compound growth, strengthening its capacity over time. As that fund grows, it will direct capital toward investments with the highest potential return for Canada and Canadians. To ensure that Canadians have the option to invest in the growth of our nation and share in the returns, the government will launch a retail investment product, which will be principal-protected. This will give Canadians a direct stake in our nation’s long-term prosperity and help build long-term national wealth. The Canada Strong fund will operate at arm’s length from government. We will create a new Crown corporation, and its work will be guided by a CEO and a qualified, independent board of directors. This model will ensure that both in the near term and in the long term the fund remains focused on its mission: supporting the transformation of the economy and creating wealth for Canadians. Canadian companies and investors are coming forward to build Canada’s future, and investors from around the world are choosing to invest in that future. We have seen many examples of this, with foreign direct investment in Canada reaching an almost 20‑year high, $97 billion of inflows. This is significant progress over the last 20 years. We see this as being a high point. We have heard from RBC, our largest bank, and from our largest pension plan, the Canada pension plan, that Canada is garnering the attention of many global investors. This is really strong evidence or signs that our plan is working. Transformational projects and companies that will help build and create a stronger, more independent and more resilient economy for Canada will stand to benefit from the sovereign wealth fund. The Canada Strong fund takes one step further, making sure that all Canadians are the beneficiaries of the financial returns that these projects will generate. Not only are we making it easier for those projects to get off the ground through the Major Projects Office, but we are also ensuring that our indigenous partners are able to participate through the loan guarantee program that our government has capitalized. We also want to make sure that all Canadians can participate in the proceeds that will come from the strong returns from many of these large infrastructure projects. This is how we ensure that Canadians have a direct stake in our nation’s long-term prosperity. It is one of the many things our government is doing to build Canada strong. In addition to the Canada Strong fund, our government is securing a more prosperous, competitive and sovereign future through initiatives like the buy Canadian policy and the Major Projects Office. I want to take a moment and talk about solidarity. The Prime Minister, in his famous speech at Davos, talked about solidarity. I think that, now more than ever, Canadians want to be a part of the Canada Strong plan. They want to be a part of building the strongest, most prosperous country in the G7. They are inspired by that vision. I think they see the potential. The sovereign wealth fund, the first ever in Canada, which I have long thought would be a good idea, enables Canadians to show their solidarity by putting in small amounts they are able to invest in Canada’s future and then benefiting from the proceeds and the prosperity we are building together. That, to me, is a great sign of solidarity. Canadians can help build this country in many different ways. They can become skilled tradespersons, but they are also able to invest in major infrastructure projects and very large projects. This is a way they can come alongside. The sovereign wealth fund will come alongside institutional investors from both around the world and here in Canada to ensure that Canadians benefit in many ways from these projects. Not only are we going to get a boost in productivity from these major infrastructure projects, as many of them support us getting more goods to foreign markets so we can help diversify the economy, but they are also going to have significant returns. We want to make sure that Canadians can participate in that. The spring economic update outlined a clear plan to build a strong and resilient Canada, built by Canadians with Canadian materials for Canadians. Ultimately, the goal is very straightforward. It is about ensuring that Canada can compete globally, attract the investment we need and create opportunity here at home for all Canadians. It is about building an economy that is resilient in the face of global change and the many challenges and headwinds we face, inclusive in its outcomes and strong enough to support future generations. We want to make sure the Canada we are building will create generational wealth for Canadians. It is about making thoughtful choices today that set Canada up not just to grow, but to lead for the future. The Canada Strong fund is a great example of how we will do this, turning today’s resources into tomorrow’s opportunities and investing for long-term prosperity, resilience and a shared sense of national success. It is that sense of solidarity all Canadians have, that sense of pride in our country, that sense of the strength we have in all of us, that grit we have as Canadians: that we want to build a better future, that we want to do it together, that we are a part of the same mission and vision as a country, and that we all should participate and benefit from the prosperity we are building together. I am happy to take questions.”

• Echo ×9

  A repeated line

  “Our government is focused on what we can control.”

  Said 9 times by 7 members since April 30.

  Every time it was said →

“I support creating a sovereign wealth fund. It will invest in major projects that create jobs, bring in tax revenue, and help all Canadians share in the country's wealth.”

“Mr. Speaker, I know the member opposite and I share many differences, but the one thing we can agree on is that Canada is the greatest country in the world and has the greatest potential to be even stronger and more prosperous than it is today. This is exactly what the sovereign wealth fund intends to do. Again, it is to help all Canadians be able to participate in the prosperity that we are building and those major projects, which are going to have high returns. I know members opposite believe in many of those projects that run through their parts of the country, which are going to benefit their communities with work opportunities and with new tax revenue for other levels of government, including the federal government. The sovereign wealth fund is going to help us give Canadians the opportunity to participate in that prosperity.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 44 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Canada should create a national wealth fund now. Other places like Alberta, Quebec, Norway, and Singapore show that these funds save money and help build wealth for everyday people.”

“Mr. Speaker, I know there is much we can learn from other entities around the world that are similar to the Canada sovereign wealth fund. We can draw lessons from Quebec’s generations fund and from Alberta’s heritage savings trust fund. We can draw learnings from Norway and Singapore. Many of these large income-generating national wealth funds have been built over decades. The idea for Canada to be setting one of these up now has the perfect timing, in my view. In fact, I would suggest that we should have done this probably 30 years ago, but it is really great that we are going to do this now to be able to have a nest egg that builds wealth in this country and distributes it to everyday Canadians.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 45 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“We want to build a strong economy and lead the G7. We are doing that through trade, new investments, and special funds. I want to know what my colleague thinks about how important this plan is.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if my colleague could provide his thoughts in regard to just how important this is in recognizing that we want to build a strong, healthy economy. We have set the goal of being the strongest in the G7. That is the goal. Part of that is recognizing that whether it is looking for trade opportunities or attracting investment into Canada or the Canada Strong fund or the sovereign wealth fund, these are all part of a much bigger picture that the Prime Minister and this government have put forward to the House in order to emphasize how critically important it is to build Canada strong for all Canadians.”

“We are making it easier to build big projects and invest in Canada. We created an office to speed up project approvals. We also added tax credits and deductions so businesses can buy new equipment and do research.”

“Mr. Speaker, that question is one that I feel very passionate about answering, because there are many things we are doing on many fronts. The Major Projects Office obviously addresses challenges that this country has faced, in terms of streamlining projects and getting approvals where investment has not been strong enough in Canada. That is exactly the intent of the Major Projects Office, to remove a lot of the barriers for investment to come into Canada and to streamline that process so we can build big things again in this country. That is great news, but it is only part of the picture. In our budget, we moved forward with new investment tax credits and strengthening those, the clean economy investment tax credits. We moved forward with major deductions and immediate expensing for businesses across Canada so they can invest in new machinery and equipment, research and development, protecting their intellectual property and much more. These things help attract investment in this country. That is exactly what we are doing, and the sovereign wealth fund is an example of how we ensure that Canadians can benefit from that.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 43 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“The government wants regular Canadians to be able to invest in our economy. This helps our country grow and helps everyday people build wealth, just like Canada savings bonds used to do.”

“Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the member opposite has such an opposition to the thought that everyday Canadians should be able to do this. When I was a kid, I had a paper route. I saved money every month, and my parents encouraged me to buy Canada savings bonds. This is essentially doing a similar thing. The Government of Canada is saying that it is going to help attract investment and build a stronger economy in Canada, and it wants to create retail opportunities so that everyday Canadians, around their kitchen table, can say, “Hey, we want to participate in the prosperity that we are building.” I know the members opposite do not like it when I talk about the paper route I had as a kid, for some reason, but buying those government savings bonds was a great tool to build wealth. My parents encouraged me to do that when I was young. We did it during the war and at any time in history when our sovereignty was tested. This is the perfect time, in my view, to help make it attractive to Canadians and give them the opportunity to participate in the process.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 31 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 41 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“This investment fund will be independent, run by its own board and leader. It will invest in large projects to make money for Canadians. Other countries use funds like this to build wealth, and the opposition is wrong to be so negative about it.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member can be assured that this will be independent, because it will be set up as a separate Crown corporation with an independent board and CEO, and it will operate under commercial terms. It will invest money in order to get returns for Canadians. We will see that fund grow over time and continue to invest in large projects that have good financial returns and will pay dividends to everyday Canadians. It is a great concept. I know that members opposite have every right to debate this. That is what the House of Commons is for. What I take issue with is the overall pessimism they have about a sovereign wealth fund. There are many examples around the world of how this can really help achieve national and generational wealth.”

“Our economy is in a strong position, and our deficit is down by $11 billion. We are cutting government spending increases while still helping Canadians with the cost of living.”

“Mr. Speaker, what is great about this fund is that we are leveraging our strong fiscal position in Canada. Again, the IMF said Canada has the strongest fiscal position in the G7. We just reported $11 billion less in the deficit. We have cut operating spending and increases. We are moving down from 8%, on average, to 2%. We are doing that, all while supporting Canadians with affordability measures and building a stronger economy. We want to ensure that Canadians can benefit from the generational wealth we are building.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 46 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“The Bloc and the Conservatives are working together to oppose a sovereign wealth fund. Other countries have these funds. It would fund major projects, create thousands of jobs, and grow Canada's economy. I want to know why they are against it.”

“Mr. Speaker, arguably, the unholy alliance is alive and well, as the Bloc and the Conservatives have united once again in order to oppose a good idea. A Canada Strong fund is there to support, in a very real and tangible way, the potential development of major projects. These projects would deliver thousands of jobs and increase Canada’s GDP. I guess that is all bad news for the Conservatives and the Bloc today. They do not see the idea and the principle behind having a sovereign wealth fund. Other nations have developed these funds, so why not Canada? Why are the Bloc and the Conservative Party against Canada having a sovereign wealth fund when there are other countries in the world that have them?”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 40 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“Canada needs a sovereign wealth fund to invest money and build a stronger economy. Other countries have them, and I do not understand why the Conservatives and the Bloc oppose it.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is somewhat disappointing that we have the Conservative and the Bloc members united in believing that this is something the country does not need. In fact, if one was to be a bit of a visionary and demonstrate some true leadership, they would understand and appreciate the actual value of having a sovereign wealth fund. There is a significant difference between what is being put on the table and the Infrastructure Bank. It is unfortunate that the members do not necessarily understand the difference between the two. We have the potential to generate investments to continue to build a stronger economy. I can understand why the Bloc might oppose Canada becoming a stronger nation, relatively speaking, but I do not understand why the Conservatives would resist something that other countries around the world have. Why is it not good enough for Canada if other countries have deemed it necessary?”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 19 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“The Conservatives want the government to do nothing. We are actually working to grow trade, bring in investment, and build the economy. Creating a national wealth fund would add tens of thousands of jobs and make our economy stronger.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would suggest it is the opposite. It is not the government that is tone-deaf; it is the leader of the Conservative Party and the collective team of Conservative members of Parliament who want to stand by and do nothing or, as they say, get out of the way. Let us contrast that to a government that has been very proactive in increasing exports, bringing in trade, bringing in investment and looking at ways to build a stronger and healthier economy. The development of a sovereign wealth fund would go a long way in the future of Canada by providing tens of thousands of jobs and a stronger, more independent economy. The Conservatives say to get out of the way. I disagree. I would ask the member opposite if he does not see any value in Canada—”

“The Conservatives lost a lot of votes in recent by-elections. I want to know why the member thinks Canadians disagree with him so much.”

“Mr. Speaker, in fact, I have recently been going door to door. I knocked on a lot of doors in Terrebonne. Given the results of the three recent by-elections, where the Conservative vote plummeted in Terrebonne, I think going from 18% to 3%, and lost half their vote in both University—Rosedale and Scarborough Southwest, I am wondering why the member thinks that Canadian voters as a whole are so blind to the brilliance that he brings to the debate.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Personal attack
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Respect 49 of 100

  This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “why the member thinks that Canadian voters as a whole are so blind to the brilliance that he brings to the debate”.

  See full analysis →

“This type of fund has worked well in countries like Norway and Singapore, even when they did not have extra money to start with. Why does the member think it will not work here?”

“Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague has really talked down this type of fund, which has been enormously successful in countries like Norway and Singapore. Both countries started the fund in similar types of ways when they were not running a surplus. Can I ask the member why he feels this type of fund is so unsuccessful when parallel funds have worked in so many other places?”

“Canadians voted for our government because they trust the Prime Minister to protect our economy. The Conservatives keep attacking us and calling us corrupt instead of focusing on what Canadians need. We are building major projects, creating a national wealth fund, and working with the provinces to make our economy stronger.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that just a year ago, Canadians chose a new government, a new Prime Minister and a direction I thought was fairly clear. Like other members, I knocked on thousands of doors during the last election. I have a fairly good sense of what the expectations of Canadians are. I have a fairly good understanding of why Canadians made the decision they made. About 8.5 million Canadians voted for the Prime Minister, the Liberal Party and the 300-plus candidates throughout the country. Canadians got the change they needed to see at the government level. However, in listening to the last speaker, it seems there has been absolutely zero change in the Conservative Party’s approach to Canada. Its members consistently talk about it being broken, and what I really find somewhat distasteful are the allegations, which are constant, to try to make it look as though members of Parliament are corrupt. The character assassination that comes over from the Conservative ranks toward the government is fairly pathetic. It is definitely consistent. What motivates the Prime Minister and every Liberal member of the Liberal caucus is what we hear from our constituents: the desire to make Canada a stronger and healthier country. It is not to get out of the way but to recognize that the government has a role to play. We heard that when we listened to what people were saying one year ago, almost to the day, when people were at the polls. What they wanted was a government that was going to be there to protect and secure Canadian interests at a time of economic uncertainty, which was being put on in good part because of President Trump with the threat of tariffs and the issue of trade. That was the issue Canadians were coming to grips with a year ago, and they wanted to hear what politicians had to say. Canadians did a comparison between the leaders. The leader of the Conservative Party, for all intents and purposes, has been a career politician and nothing really beyond that. Canadians contrasted him with the current Prime Minister, the one they chose, who had actually been appointed to be the Governor of the Bank of Canada by a Conservative prime minister, Stephen Harper. He has also been the Governor of the Bank of England. Virtually throughout the G20 countries and beyond, the Prime Minister is recognized as a first-rate economist, someone who genuinely understands the economy. That is why he was so well received in Davos with the speech he delivered there. Our Prime Minister understands what it takes to build an economy. From day one after the election, that is where the focus of the government has been, serving Canadians first and foremost. With respect to all the trash talk we hear from members of the Conservative Party towards the integrity of members, whether the Prime Minister or other ministers, I say shame on the Conservatives for trying to give false impressions and mislead Canadians, whether it is here on the floor of the House of Commons, through social media or through the millions of emails they send out. It does a disservice. There is an expectation that the official opposition be a critic of the government, but I was in opposition for many years, and as I said before, there is a fine line. Actually, it is a very broad line, and the Conservatives have crossed that line. At least, the current leadership of the Conservative Party has crossed that line, because it is catering to the far right, the extreme far right, quite frankly. That might feed some of the Conservative base, but it is time to start focusing on what Canadians are saying and on the interests of the country. It is time that the far-right Conservative Party today and its House leadership team start paying more attention to the needs of Canadians than to the needs of the self-serving Conservative leadership team of today. I say that in such a manner because of the personal shots that are constantly being raised, as if personal gain or giving political whatever to so-called friends were the motivating factor. I can tell the House that the government has given grants to Conservatives, to New Democrats, to Liberals and to apolitical individuals. That is not a measuring stick when it comes to the progress of our great nation. It is all about building a stronger Canadian economy for all Canadians. Take a look at what actions we have taken to date that, collectively, are making a difference and that will provide hope for the future of Canada’s economy. Every Liberal member of Parliament believes that Canada is the greatest country in the world to call home, and we are committed to building on the hopes, desires and needs of the nation today so Canada will continue to be the best country in the world to call home. That does not mean we stand out of the way and do nothing. Look at what has actually been proposed by the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and, in fact, the entire Liberal caucus: a sovereign wealth fund. There is an unholy alliance between the Bloc and the Conservatives. They are now in the opposition. They have united on this saying, “No, no, it is not good for Canada.” There are dozens of sovereign wealth funds around the world today, but the opposition does not believe Canada should have a sovereign wealth fund. Our fund, the Canada Strong fund, is a wonderful opportunity to offer investors abroad and at home. I also like to believe it is going to have an impact on people who do have some extra finances. They would like to be able to be part of a strategic fund dealing with our sovereignty, be able to demonstrate a sense of pride in our nation, be provided some guarantees, and invest in Canada. In terms of the administration, think in terms of the building office that we have, the Major Projects Office, which is located in the Prairies, as well it should be. Take a look at a lot of the investments and the driving force, in many ways, over the next few years. We want major projects. We not only want them; we also want to see them turn into a reality. I would argue that we would have to go back generations and generations before we would find a Prime Minister who has been as committed to attracting the types of investments that are necessary and to doing the work that is necessary in order to build the type of support to build and to build big. By doing that, we are going to provide the opportunities, the jobs, the incomes and the GDP growth into the future. Even if we do not realize all of that in the next year or two, let us get the ball moving on it. It is a bit of a joke when I hear the leader of the Conservative Party inside the House or outside the House try to compare himself to the Prime Minister, saying that the Prime Minister has no understanding of how an economy works. That is like saying that Wayne Gretzky does not know how to skate or that Céline Dion cannot sing. How silly that is. Really and truly, do the Conservatives believe that there is anyone who believes those sorts of assertions that come from the leader of the Conservative Party? If I go back to a week or so after the last federal election, I remember Bill C-5, the One Canadian Economy Act, and the actions that the federal government took, literally weeks after coming back in session, to take down barriers so at least from a national perspective we would have one Canadian economy. There have been efforts back then and today through which we are continuing to encourage other premiers to start taking down some of the provincial barriers. Whether it is with respect to consumer products or labour mobility, we need to continue to push, encourage and support a team Canada approach at building Canada strong. The need is there, and it was demonstrated throughout the election, when people were telling me and everyone else at the door about their concern about the dependency Canada has on the United States as a direct result of threats of tariffs on our products. We responded in many different ways. Bill C-5 is just one of those ways: one Canadian economy. However, that was not it. Within that same two- or three-week span, we made the commitment to develop the Major Projects Office, and the Prime Minister made it known that we want to hear ideas. We want premiers and stakeholders, both private and public, to talk about the types of ideas that are going to allow us to build, and to build big. A lot of ideas came forward. The provinces stepped up to the plate in a very real and tangible way in every region of our nation. For the first time, we were talking about major projects and how the federal government and the provincial governments, working with others, can expedite, encourage and promote major projects, and ultimately turn them into reality wherever we can. Alberta is a great example. Think of the tension that was within the province of Alberta in a lot of the discussions that were taking place. The Prime Minister, who has roots in the Prairies, in Edmonton in the north, is especially compassionate and wants us to actually move forward on major projects. That is the reason, with respect to pipelines, that we now have an MOU with the Province of Alberta. Do members remember when that issue came up and the Prime Minister and the Premier of Alberta made the announcement? All the Alberta Conservative MPs were either sitting on their hands saying nothing or were criticizing the fact that, though we had the MOU, it was not good enough. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, they ask, “What is built?” Well, when the leader of the Conservative Party was in government for over 10 years, the Conservatives did not build one inch of pipeline to the coastline. I will contrast that with what the current Prime Minister has done in one year for the advancement of—”

“The member is wrongly accusing me of trying to mislead the House.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member is actually imputing my motives. He is indicating that I am intentionally misleading—”

“Our government invests in major projects like green energy, transit, and infrastructure to grow the economy. We are also helping Canadians with the cost of living through programs like dental care. The Conservatives oppose these good investments just to play politics, and they should support them instead.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will stand by my word, and I look forward to the member coming back to the House and sharing with me which pipeline his leader actually built that went to the west coast. Yes, they did have pipelines that went down to the United States, but let us remember what the argument is. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: He says I am confused, Mr. Speaker. There is a difference between west and east versus north and south. The point is that there are major projects. The Conservative Party takes one approach, and that approach is just to get out of the way. As a government, we recognize the value of being involved by having things like a sovereign wealth fund, which will make a difference, and by having things such as the Infrastructure Bank, something the Conservative Party is on the record constantly opposing. We have seen literally billions of dollars’ worth of investments in different areas drawn upon by different levels of government and by private industries. That money was put into the economy: buses, transport, energy and many other aspects. The Canada Strong fund— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, this is all good stuff, and if the Conservatives did their homework, they would know it. The problem is that all they do is rely too much on their backroom, the spin and ChatGPT. That is what they rely on in terms of delivering their comments on the floor of the House of Commons. The other side has to calm down over there. The bottom line is that when we see something good come to the floor of the House of Commons, there is nothing wrong with supporting it. There is nothing wrong with saying something is a good thing for Canada. It does not mean a member has to be 100% for it. They could raise some issues in regard to it or raise some concerns, but they should not try to give an impression that it is not good for Canada. I believe that whether it is this initiative that we have announced or other initiatives that the government has brought forward, the motivating factor for it all is to reflect on what Canadians are telling us at the door. Members of Parliament, at least within the Liberal caucus, are working with their constituents. They are bringing their thoughts, ideas and concerns here, whether they are about jobs or affordability, and dealing with them in a very tangible way. That is what the spring update does, among many other things. It reassures people. There is comfort in knowing we have a government that wants to expand the economy; that is prepared to help out on the affordability issue by doing things like the groceries and essentials program and reinforcing the dental care program; and that understands that expanding trade opportunities, bringing in investment dollars and building big projects are all things that are going to help us, whether it is increasing the GDP into the future, increasing people’s wages or providing the jobs that are necessary. Through that, we are better able to provide social programs. It is time that the Conservatives change their attitude, listen to what they were told in the last election and give more attention to Canadians’ best interests as opposed to the Conservative Party’s best interests. I suspect that if they actually followed that advice, they might do a bit better. Maybe their leader would be more secure into the future.”

“My government built pipelines to the ocean and supported major energy projects, not the Conservatives. The Conservatives just attack people instead of working on good policy.”

“Mr. Speaker, the nice thing about Hansard is that all we have to do is look at what I said. The member just reinforced that. The pipeline the member is talking about does not go to tidewater, and that is what I said. Not one inch of it goes to tidewater. Let us contrast that to TMX. That goes to tidewater. That was not Conservative. It was Liberal. The biggest private-public investment was in LNG between the NDP government in B.C. and the Liberal government here in Ottawa. It had nothing to do with Harper or the Conservatives. The Conservatives talk a lot. Often they are very disrespectful because they focus so much attention on character assassination as opposed to good public policy.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 35 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“What the member said is false. We are building major projects all across Canada, not just in Alberta. We are funding projects in Quebec, Ontario, Atlantic Canada, Alberta, British Columbia, and Manitoba.”

“Mr. Speaker, that is just false, and the member knows what he just said is false. The major projects include the expansion of the port of Montreal. I will give the member a tip. Montreal is in Quebec. At the end of the day, there are major projects in all areas of Canada. The office has to be located somewhere. I am very proud of the fact that it happens to be in Alberta. Having said that, let us look at the major projects. As I referenced, there is the expansion of the port of Montreal and a nuclear project in the province of Ontario. We can talk about energy transmission lines in Atlantic Canada. We can talk about pipelines in Alberta. We can talk about copper mines and LNG in B.C. We can talk about the potential for the port of Churchill in Manitoba.”

• Personal attack
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Respect 89 of 100

  This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “the member knows what he just said is false”.

  See full analysis →
• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →