“Tariffs are hurting manufacturing and costing people jobs in my riding. The Prime Minister promised to fix this, but he has not negotiated with the American president in seven months. Is the government tricking Canadians while they wait for help?”

“Mr. Speaker, I stand today as a proud representative of London—Fanshawe, part of which has a great manufacturing sector. However, we have been hit with tariffs, and, repeatedly, the people of London—Fanshawe are having to deal with the affordability crisis and concerns about being unemployed, or they actually have been unemployed, due to various sectors’ being affected by the tariffs. The Liberals have repeatedly said that they are going to solve the tariff issues, yet the Prime Minister has not negotiated with President Trump in the last seven months, so my question is this: Are we witnessing a political bait-and-switch while Canadians are still waiting for a solution?”

“The member praised the government for acting quickly on trade. Can she name one American tariff on Canadian goods that the government actually got removed?”

“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member’s focus on supporting businesses in her community. She displayed a very admirable depth of knowledge of those businesses. Burlington, of course, is a region that is deeply connected to cross-border trade, where jobs and local growth depend heavily on the government being able to address these issues. She praised the government’s swift action. I am wondering if the member could name a single U.S. tariff on Canadian goods that has been lifted as a direct result of Liberal government action.”

“Companies are losing money from American tariffs. This government loan program must be paid back in three years. I worry businesses will not take these loans and will close down faster instead.”

“Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague’s speech. It is apparent that he was a teacher before becoming an MP. Going back to the $1.5-billion program, we are talking about loans that must be repaid over three years. However, companies are losing money due to U.S. tariffs. With these 25% tariffs, they are forced to lower their prices to remain competitive, or they will be forced out of the market. If businesses decide not to take advantage of this program, could it speed up the closure of small and medium-sized businesses in Canada, given that it is not the government that is experiencing the tariff problem, but businesses, because they have to pay back or postpone the losses they are currently experiencing?”

“The U.S. is putting taxes on Canadian steel, aluminum, lumber, and auto parts. Canada needs to use our energy and minerals as bargaining power to get a trade deal. Why has the government failed to stand up for our workers?”

“Mr. Speaker, I think the member opposite understands the problem, but he is not providing the solution. Instead of talking about the issue, he was focused on improving his French in his speech. The U.S. continues to impose tariffs on key Canadian sectors: steel, aluminum, lumber and auto parts. If Canada wants a deal with the United States, we need leverage. Our leverage comes from our strengths: our energy, our critical minerals and our ability to supply the inputs that North American industries depend on. Why have the Liberals failed to defend Canadian industries and workers in these critical sectors?”

• Echo ×4

  A repeated line

  “If Canada wants a deal with the United States.”

  Said 4 times by 4 members since April 24.

  Every time it was said →

“Life is too expensive in London, and our 9.1% unemployment rate is the highest in Canada. Many people have to use food banks. I want to know when the Prime Minister will fix the tariff problem.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member opposite mentioned vision. If this is the Liberal government’s vision, I find quite concerning, especially as I represent the people of London—Fanshawe, but it is also concerning for the region of London. We are talking about the affordability crisis and the cost of living crisis, and London’s 9.1% unemployment is the highest in Canada. That is a concern also. Also with regard to vision, especially for the people who have to utilize the food bank, what we do tell the people in the lineup of the food bank about when the Prime Minister is going to come through and solve the tariff issue?”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 28 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 →

“Canadian factories are closing and jobs are moving to the United States. The Liberals are hurting our manufacturing with higher taxes and too many rules. Can the member explain the damage these policies cause?”

“Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the excellent speech he gave and the concerns he displayed. Manufacturing industries are closing. Canadian workers and businesses already know there is no deal on the tariffs coming any time soon. Jobs are moving south. The U.S. is offering incentives for the manufacturing sector while the Liberal government is offering delays, higher taxes, more red tape and no clear path forward. Why are the Liberals making it harder to build and produce in Canada? Can the member explain the impacts of higher taxes, more regulations and the lack of a real plan to support our industries?”

“Government loans do not help struggling businesses, because they just add more debt. We need to lower tariffs and cut red tape so businesses can compete. I am asking the Bloc member to comment on this.”

“Mr. Speaker, real relief does not come from government loan programs. It comes from getting tariffs reduced or eliminated. Loans do not restore competitiveness. They saddle struggling businesses with more debt, while the underlying problem remains. At the same time, the Liberals are failing to focus on what Canada can control. Instead of strengthening our economy at home, they continue to layer on red tape, slow approvals and policies that make it harder to build, produce and compete. I wonder if the member from the Bloc could expand on this.”