Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act

Bill C-30, Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act · Second reading · now law Where it stands

What the law does

The law implements measures from the spring economic update, temporarily removing the federal excise tax on gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels from April 20, 2026, to September 7, 2026. It lowers Canada Pension Plan contribution rates starting in 2027 and extends extra Employment Insurance weeks for seasonal workers to October 2028. It also makes other changes to tax rules, alcohol excise duties, transportation data, and federal regulation of banking, food inspection, and pest control products.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

61 statements

Tamara Jansen, Cloverdale—Langley City

Conservative
“Canadians are struggling with high debt, expensive housing, and the cost of food and medicine. The Liberals say the economy is doing great. I want them to explain why so many people feel like they are falling behind.”
  • A repeated line

    “Food bank usage is at a record high.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since May 25.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Canada now has some of the highest household debt and least affordable housing in the G7. Food bank use is at a record high. Seniors are skipping meals. Young families are delaying having children. Working parents are choosing between groceries, rent and medication. However, I have heard the Liberals say over and over today that they are improving affordability and that Canada’s economy is doing great. My question is simple. If life is supposedly getting better, why are so many Canadians feeling like they are falling further behind every single month?

Scot Davidson, New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury

Conservative
“People and small businesses in my riding are broke and struggling. We need local infrastructure like gas lines and electricity, but the government is sending money overseas instead.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is right. Canadians are flat broke. I spent time in the riding over these last two weeks. I could not believe the stories people and small business owners were telling me. As an aside, and I have spoken about this a number of times, we have been waiting 10 years for natural gas lines in my riding and for phase three hydro so small businesses can start. People are coming to me, frustrated, asking, “Why are we sending all this money overseas? Why am I on the outside looking in when all I am trying to do is just get ahead?”

Mario Beaulieu, La Pointe-de-l'Île

Bloc Québécois
“I want to know what my colleague thinks about two risks in this bill. First, it could make our food less safe by forcing inspectors to care as much about business profits as human health. Second, it could let foreign banks take control of Canadian banks.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague’s point of view. Forcing the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to consider both economic impact and impact on people’s health equally will increase food safety risks. Furthermore, encouraging foreign platforms to enter an open banking system will reduce the restrictions that prevent foreign banks from taking control of our banks. What does my colleague think about that?

Scot Davidson, New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury

Conservative
“The government claims the carbon tax and their wealth fund do not hurt prices or costs. If their ideas work as well as they claim, they should put way more money into them.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

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

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 32 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
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as in my opening, I am always proud to represent the soup and salad bowl of Canada. Again, going back to the Liberal government with the industrial carbon tax, the Liberals sit there and say that the industrial carbon tax does not affect the price of anything and that it is actually good for prices. I go back to what I said about the wealth fund. If raising the industrial carbon tax does not affect anything, why only raise it to $170? They should put it up to $400. It does not affect anything. It is the same with the wealth fund. Why $25 billion? If the returns are so good, why not put $500 billion in it and get it going?

Elizabeth May, Saanich—Gulf Islands

Green
“I agree with my colleague. Other countries save their oil money for the future, but the Liberal fund does not do that. I want to know what my colleague thinks about this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to agree with my colleague. The sovereign wealth funds of other countries, particularly Norway’s, were designed on Peter Lougheed’s plan, which was to take oil revenue out of government rents and using it as a set-aside for a rainy day, which is not what the Liberals’ fund proposes to do. I wonder if my hon. colleague has any comments.

Scot Davidson, New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury

Conservative
“The government broke its promise to build a vaccine factory in Quebec. It wasted $300 million of our money.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 35 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
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we are all concerned about the promises the government makes. It is all pie in the sky. We spent $300 million. We were supposed to have a factory that actually created vaccines for Canadians in Quebec. Where is that factory now? Where is the $300 million? That is what Canadians call waste.

Pauline Rochefort, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State (Rural Development)

Liberal
“I support this budget bill. It creates a national fund that lets everyday Canadians invest in big building projects to grow our economy. The government is also spending money in my riding to protect mining jobs, build battery materials, and add affordable homes.”
  • A repeated line

    “As part of the spring economic update.”

    Said 4 times by 4 members since May 25.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from La Prairie—Atateken. I rise today to speak to the spring economic statement and to confirm that I will be voting in support of Bill C-30, an act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update that was tabled in the House of Commons on April 28. There are many important elements within both the bill and the statement, but today I would like to focus on two central themes. First is the proposed Canada Strong fund and what it represents for the people of Nipissing—Timiskaming in providing an opportunity to be all in for Canada. Secondly, I would like to speak to the many ways that Canada is supporting the residents of Nipissing—Timiskaming, demonstrating that Canada is also all in for its citizens. I am glad that today in the House, there are members from my riding. On that note, I spent the last two weeks in my riding meeting with residents and attending community events and local functions. What I sensed in general was a growing feeling that this is a moment for Canadians to come together. I believe it is much like being part of a team, and I am sure fans of the Montreal Canadiens understand the analogy well, especially today. When the stakes are high, it is not the time to sit back on the bench. It is time to ask ourselves, how can we contribute to the success of the team? The same is true for Canada today. We may have different views on strategy, but once the game has started, our success depends on our ability to work together toward a common goal. In many ways, the times we are living in now remind me of the period following the Second World War. I was not alive then, but according to history books, Canada was facing the enormous task of rebuilding and strengthening the country. At that time, Canadians were able to directly participate in building the nation through Canada savings bonds. As part of the spring economic statement, the Prime Minister announced the Canada Strong fund, the country’s first national sovereign wealth fund. This proposed fund would allow individual Canadians to co-invest alongside institutional partners in large-scale, nation-building infrastructure projects. While we have discussed it here today, the final design of the fund has not yet been announced, as it will be shaped through consultations that will begin shortly. However, even at this early stage, the spirit behind the initiative reminds me of the era of Canada savings bonds, established in 1945 under former prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King. For generations, Canada savings bonds provided Canadians with a trusted and accessible way to support the growth and transformation of the economy, while building wealth for themselves and their families. They were promoted not merely as financial instruments but as tools of nation building, fostering a culture of shared economic purpose during a period when millions of Canadians were emerging from uncertainty and insecurity. One constituent in my riding recently shared with me how much pride his father had. His father worked for a small township in Timiskaming, and he earned a modest income. His son spoke of how his father was proud when he purchased his first Canada savings bond because for him, it meant that he was contributing to Canada, to its growth, to the country he loved and to something that was larger than himself. I can actually relate to that personally because when I started to work, I purchased my own Canada savings bonds. I was in my 20s. I am somewhat embarrassed to say that my motivation was not about savings at that age, but it was about contributing to Canada. It was about supporting my country and feeling connected to something bigger than myself. Although the program ended almost a decade ago, for almost 70 years it meant Canadians had the opportunity to contribute directly to our country’s success. Because of my own experience, and what I continue to hear from residents across Nipissing—Timiskaming, I strongly support both the concept of and the rationale behind the proposed Canada Strong fund. A strong economy is not built by government and industry alone. It is built when citizens feel connected to the opportunities ahead and confident they have a role to play in shaping the future. The Canada Strong fund is about building Canada together. From energy to infrastructure to mining, the fund will invest across key sectors while delivering market rate returns for Canadians who choose to participate. I particularly appreciate the Prime Minister’s emphasis on making the fund accessible to all Canadians, regardless of their economic situation. In my view, that is important because it strengthens Canadians’ connection to their country and to the values that define us. In many ways, the Canada Strong fund reflects the same spirit that was once behind the Canada savings bonds. As Prime Minister Mackenzie King said, our duty is to give all of our citizens a greater measure of security. Today, Canada continues to pursue that same goal: to provide Canadians with greater security and greater certainty at a time that is marked by economic and geopolitical uncertainty, as many in the House have mentioned. I am proud to live in a country that has the backs of its citizens in practical and meaningful ways. Canada is supporting families, workers, seniors, businesses and communities, including the residents of my riding, Nipissing—Timiskaming. While time permits only a few examples, these measures demonstrate how federal investments are making a tangible difference in the lives of the people in my riding. Last week, I was pleased to announce funding through the regional tariff response initiative to support five prominent mining sector companies in my riding as they modernize and expand their operations in the face of unfair and unjust tariffs. These investments will protect jobs and create better-paying jobs throughout our riding. Through the strategic response fund, we also saw approval for Electra Battery Materials Corporation’s $100-million project to produce battery-grade cobalt sulphate in Timiskaming. For our country, domestic cobalt sulphate production will reduce the reliance on imports and strengthen key sectors such as electric vehicles, defence manufacturing, semiconductors and medical technologies. For Nipissing—Timiskaming, that represents 60 direct jobs and, during the construction, 100 skilled trade workers who will be working on the construction site. Last week, I was pleased to confirm an investment through the Canada-Ontario community housing initiative to support the construction of 60 affordable homes in North Bay. Affordable housing remains one of the most—

Pauline Rochefort, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State (Rural Development)

Liberal
“The government's programs are helping thousands of people in my riding. They help pay for groceries, dental care, school meals, and new homes. Federal investments are also building needed local infrastructure and strengthening our national defence.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I also wanted to point out that I was surprised to see the numbers. In my riding, approximately 28,000 residents will begin benefiting from the new groceries and essentials benefit in July. There are more than 14,000 residents in Nipissing—Timiskaming who qualify for dental care support, more than 12,000 elementary school students benefit from healthy meal programs, and over 10,000 families are receiving the Canada child benefit. Then there is the very strong support in Nipissing—Timiskaming for the recently announced 13% HST relief on new homes. This measure will help make home ownership more attainable for young people and families seeking to enter the housing market. At the same time, the federal government and the Province of Ontario have announced an $8.8-billion cost-shared infrastructure program over 10 years to support municipalities. This funding will help lower development costs for contractors and home builders while ensuring continued investment in roads, water systems and other housing-enabling infrastructure. These are precisely the kinds of measures that municipalities, builders and organizations, such as the Northern Ontario Home Builders’ Association, have been calling for. I believe I am coming to the end of my speech. I could give several more examples, but I would like to talk about 22 Wing in North Bay and the Northern Ontario Road to Defence. Residents are also seeing that new investments are strengthening Canada’s ability to maintain its sovereignty, such as the over-the-horizon radar, which is very important for the town of North Bay. Taken together, these measures demonstrate how Canada is supporting the residents of Nipissing—Timiskaming and showing that our country is all in for its residents. That matters because the federal government has important responsibilities to protect national security and public safety, to provide support through programs such as the Canada pension plan and old age security, and to provide support to indigenous communities to promote economic stability—

Martin Champoux, Drummond

Bloc Québécois
“This budget update does not help local media. Independent TV stations in rural areas might close without government support. I want to know how the member will convince the government to help them.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that my colleague from Nipissing—Timiskaming did not have more time. She could have started telling us about her government’s support for regional media. Oops, there is none. There is no support for regional media in this economic update, particularly for independent regional TV stations. I mention this because in her region and nearby, in Abitibi—Témiscamingue, local TV stations broadcasting independent news—probably the last in this region to offer a diversity of voices and information, apart from CBC/Radio-Canada—are at risk of closing because they are not receiving any support from this government. Once again, Liberal MPs are going to vote for this budget while the regional media are being let down. My colleague is an MP for a regional riding in Ontario. I am certain she is concerned about the fate of the media. I would like to know what she intends to say to the minister or the Prime Minister to convince him to finally come to the aid of the regional media.

Pauline Rochefort, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State (Rural Development)

Liberal
“I agree with my colleague. Local media and journalists, including CBC/Radio-Canada and Le Voyageur, are very important to my community. I support helping them.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I share my colleague’s concern. It is very important to have local media. In my riding, CBC/Radio-Canada plays a very important role. The support given to local journalists is also important. This program plays an important role in our community with media outlets, such as Le Voyageur. I agree with my colleague’s comment. He can count on my support in that regard.

Steven Bonk, Souris—Moose Mountain

Conservative
“The government changed how it tracks its debt limits. Canada is the only G7 country that leaves out provincial debt from this math. I want to know what Canada's true debt number would be if we counted it like other countries do.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we have seen the government, midway through its term, change the definitions of its fiscal anchors. Instead of debt-to-GDP ratio, it is debt-to-deficit ratio. One thing that I want to get a clear answer on from the member opposite is that, in the G7, Canada is the only country that does not count subnational debt when it is talking about debt-to-GDP ratios. What would the number be if Canada used the same accounting practices as all other countries?

Pauline Rochefort, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State (Rural Development)

Liberal
“The International Monetary Fund says Canada manages its money better than any other G7 country. I want people in the member's riding to read our economic update to see how well our economy is doing.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I understand the question fully. I would like to point out to my colleague that the International Monetary Fund is a very important organization. Practically 90% of countries across the world belong to the fund. It plays an important role in comparing economies across the world. What it states, with respect to Canada, is very important. Basically, in April, it stated that Canada, among the G7, is the most fiscally responsible country. It takes a very important position. It speaks strongly about Canada. There are so many other indicators that we could point to, and that is why I encourage all the citizens from my colleague’s riding to read the spring economic update and to see and take good note of the many positive economic indicators.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Our government believes in investing money into Canada, our infrastructure, and our people to create jobs. The Conservatives oppose these investments and want the government to get out of the way. I want my colleague to explain why these government investments are so important.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated my colleague’s comments on the Canada Strong fund. I think it is a wonderful opportunity for Canadians to invest in Canada. To have that opportunity, I think is something that is being provided for here. The Conservatives have come out against it. We often hear Conservatives being against the Infrastructure Bank, for example. It is a bank that, along with the federal government, has lured billions of dollars of investment, generated thousands of jobs and had major projects in every region of the country. The contrast seems to be that the current government believes in investing in Canada, in infrastructure and in Canadians, while the Conservatives tend to just want to get out of the way, as they often say. I am wondering if the member could provide her thoughts on why it is really important that, as a government, we invest in Canadians and in infrastructure.

Pauline Rochefort, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State (Rural Development)

Liberal
“The International Monetary Fund says Canada's economy is strong, and our government's investments support that. We have not shared the final plan for our new investment fund yet because we are still talking to people. We are studying funds from around the world to build the best one for Canada.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have two comments. The International Monetary Fund speaks of Canada and its economy as being strong. It truly is the aggregate of the many organizations that work in the economic field. Canada’s Infrastructure Bank is an excellent example of that. As I said, there are many other indicators that are in support of all of the various investment actions and tools that the government is taking. With respect to the wealth fund, the sovereign fund that we have discussed, I do want to point out that it is very important that the design of the funds has not been publicly announced yet. There are consultations that are under way. Just to conclude, there are a hundred different funds across the world. Basically, the government is looking at all of these various funds as it structures what is best for Canada and for Canadians.

Jacques Ramsay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Liberal
“I support our economic plan. It lowers the deficit, helps people buy food, funds school lunches, and lowers bank fees. It also helps build more homes and creates jobs in the trades.”
  • A repeated line

    “We have also made the national school food program permanent.”

    Said 14 times by 11 members since May 7.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House on behalf of my constituents in La Prairie, Candiac, Sainte‑Catherine, Saint‑Constant, Delson, Saint‑Philippe, Saint‑Mathieu and Kahnawake. This is especially true today as I rise to illustrate what the spring economic update means in concrete terms for the families of La Prairie—Atateken, for our jobs, and for the future of our community. Let me be blunt: This government is working for the people of La Prairie—Atateken, and the measures announced in the recent economic statement are proof of that. The world has changed. Trade tensions with our neighbour, geopolitical turmoil such as the war in Iran, and disruptions in supply chains are creating real uncertainty. For the past year, we have been navigating an increasingly fragmented, rapidly changing world. However, what I can say is that, while other countries are retreating as they wait for better days to return, Canada is acting with conviction and resolve, without hesitation. The spring economic update confirms Canada’s fiscal strength, while investing in Canadians where it truly matters. The results speak for themselves. With an $11.5‑billion reduction in the projected deficit, our fiscal position is much stronger than expected. We are managing things well—all spending items have been reviewed—we are spending wisely, and we are focusing on long-term prosperity. Let us recall that, by 2028-29, the deficit will consist only of capital investment. The operating deficit, meanwhile, will have been eliminated. That is what is known as long-term vision. Let me begin by addressing something that has an immediate bearing on the day-to-day finances of my constituents. The Canada groceries and essentials benefit will support more than 30,000 residents of La Prairie—Atateken so they can buy groceries and essential goods. Payments will go out starting June 5. This support will go directly into the bank accounts of many of my constituents. It is not a promise. It is a cheque. We also made the national school food program permanent. This means that, year after year, Quebec will now receive its share to ensure that our schools can feed our children. Full bellies help children learn better. My colleague says that Quebec is handling that, but the federal government is also providing funds. Another measure has to do with bank fees. The government is now capping overdraft fees at $10, thereby strengthening consumer protection. It is these small, cumulative measures that make a real difference in a tight family budget. We have also simplified the application process for the disability tax credit for people with certain long-term medical conditions. For families who have been battling bureaucracy for years, this simplification is a tangible victory. I used to be a family doctor, so I can attest to this. The government is also extending assistance to people experiencing homelessness and working to ensure that victims of gender-based violence have access to safe housing. Of course, as is the case across the country, there is a shortage of public housing and transitional housing, but we are committed to supporting projects that address this need. Significant budgets are allocated for this purpose through Build Canada Homes, because a strong government is one that leaves no one behind. I said this during the election campaign, and I will say it again: Housing is a key priority for the government, particularly for La Prairie—Atateken. This economic update clearly demonstrates that. One of the things the government is doing is reducing development charges. The government is also providing GST relief for first-time homebuyers, as well as simplifying rules and modernizing building codes to facilitate the construction of prefabricated and modular housing. In fact, $7 billion in low-cost financing is being fast-tracked to CMHC so builders can get projects built sooner and get more rental units to market faster. Over the past year, there has been a significant increase in the supply of affordable housing in my region. Given that young families are looking to settle down and that property prices have skyrocketed in recent years, these measures are a lifeline that will help our children find housing close to home, not three hours away. Our constituency is made up of working people—people who build houses, work in factories and keep the south shore economy going. This economic update recognizes them. For example, I would like to mention the reduced CPP contribution rate, which will fall from 9.9% to 9.5% on January 1. This represents an annual saving of about $133 for an employee earning $70,000 a year, and equivalent savings for the employer. This is no small matter. For a couple where both partners work, that is nearly $270 more in their pockets each year. Parents hope that their children will be able to build a stable career on the south shore. For our young people who are about to enter the job market and who are being hit hard by current unemployment rates, the government is launching a national initiative aimed at recruiting, training and hiring between 80,000 and 100,000 new skilled trades workers by 2030-31. These are more than 50 in-demand trades with solid wages, such as electricians, plumbers, carpenters and welders. Now there is a national program to access these trades, and it is going to be funded to the tune of $2 billion over five years. The spring economic update also offers a long-term vision for Canada’s economy, and our region will benefit from it directly. The Major Projects Office will oversee 21 initiatives of national interest that will interconnect, diversify and power our economy. These initiatives will support the creation of 60,000 jobs during construction and generate over $125 billion in new investments. These infrastructure, road, trade corridor and energy projects will have a direct impact on our region, at the centre of Quebec’s economic corridor. Consider, for example, Canada’s defence industrial strategy and the proximity of the Saint-Jean military base. Consider, for example, the expansion of the Port of Montreal at Contrecoeur, which is expected to generate $140 million in spinoffs every year, including in my riding. Finally, consider the Saint-Hubert metropolitan airport, launched this week by Minister MacKinnon, which will soon welcome four million travellers a year—

Jacques Ramsay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Liberal
“Our economy is doing well. We brought in over $100 billion in foreign investment and increased our exports, which creates jobs. Experts say Canada will have strong economic growth. This bill supports that growth by lowering taxes and helping people with housing and groceries.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, consider the Saint-Hubert metropolitan airport, which was inaugurated this week by the Minister of Transport and will soon welcome four million travellers a year, with major implications for the tourism industry, to name just one. Canada is buzzing with excitement. That is why the country has attracted more than $100 billion in foreign investment over the past year, a level not seen in nearly two decades. It also explains why we have established some 20 new economic and defence partnerships across four continents. Canada has also increased its exports to markets outside the United States by $33 billion this year. That means jobs are being created here in Canada, including on the south shore. Some might say we are spending too much, but let us hear what the experts have to say. Canada is on track for long-term prosperity, according to estimates from the International Monetary Fund, which ranks Canada second among G7 nations this year in terms of projected growth. We are investing in what matters, and we are doing so responsibly. As the member for La Prairie—Atateken, I want to tell my constituents that this economic update demonstrates that the government is working for them with lower taxes, greater affordability, more help with groceries, more accessible housing, jobs for our young people and a clear vision for Canada’s economic future, a future that is diverse and focused on buying local. That is what we are delivering. La Prairie—Atateken is growing, and the government will be there to support its development.

Mike Lake, Leduc—Wetaskiwin

Conservative

Linked statement

“Canada's economy and national unity would improve if Alberta could sell its oil around the world. Foreign oil from Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and Algeria faces fewer emission rules than Alberta oil. I want to know if the member thinks that is fair.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 1 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, one thing that would help Canada’s fiscal situation substantially and would help our national unity situation substantially is if we were allowed to sell our resources from Alberta around the world. Currently, because of policies put in place by this member’s government over the last 10 years, oil shipped from Alberta is subject to more rigorous emission standards than oil imported from Saudi Arabia and Nigeria to Canada. Does the member think it is okay that oil coming from Nigeria, Saudi Arabia or Algeria is subject to less rigorous standards than oil and gas coming from Alberta?

Jacques Ramsay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Liberal
“Our government is helping the economy in western Canada, and Alberta's premier supports our work there. We can protect the environment and build a strong economy at the same time.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, in response to my colleague, I would say that, on the contrary, our government is currently doing a great deal to develop the economy of the western provinces, and I would refer him to the statements made by Danielle Smith, who has welcomed the projects we are launching with Alberta. That said, there is no conflict here. I think that Canada, as a responsible country, must be concerned about the environment, certainly more than some of the countries my colleague mentioned. I believe we can do better than some of the countries he mentioned. There is no contradiction between building a strong economy and doing so efficiently and in an environmentally friendly way. I believe Canadians understand this and support the plan we are proposing.

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Laurentides—Labelle

Bloc Québécois
“The government tells us to buy Canadian goods, but its trade deals let it buy goods made in other countries. I want clear rules. I expect officials to give straight answers when they meet with our committee.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, earlier I dared to speak my mind loud and clear, and I will say it again: One day the government will have to get its house in order and become experts on the “Buy Canadian” policy, among other things. I digress, but it will soon be clear why, as that is my question for my colleague. How is it that government investments have a direct impact when we have free trade agreements, and how is it that the government is saying to buy Canadian when the goods will be manufactured abroad, in Europe, for example? This is somehow allowed under these agreements. Can we have a clear framework? The deputy ministers will be appearing before the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, and we expect them to be clear, straightforward and precise.

Jacques Ramsay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Liberal
“The government buys a lot of goods and services, and we want to buy more from local and Canadian businesses. I want our contracts to require Canadian materials and Canadian workers.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that I properly understood the question. I understand that it had to do with buying local. I think the government has made its intentions clear on that subject. It took a tremendous amount of work to validate that. It was highly complex. The government buys a lot. There are a lot of contracts. However, our intention is very clear. We intend to deliver something that will stimulate our local industry and Canadian industry, not only in terms of materials, but also in terms of hours worked here, domestically. I also believe that provisions covering this should be included in the contracts. That is my position. I hope that my government will support it.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 121

  1. Private Members' Business Criminal Code 10 statements
  2. Private Members' Business Points of Order 2 statements
  3. Government Orders Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 37 statements
  4. Government Orders Government Orders 17 statements
  5. Oral Questions Taxation 6 statements
  6. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 6 statements
  7. Oral Questions Employment 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Taxation 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 6 statements
  11. Oral Questions Public Safety 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Foreign Investment 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 10 statements
  14. Oral Questions Justice 6 statements
  15. Oral Questions Foreign Affairs 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions CBC/Radio-Canada 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions The Environment 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 7 statements
  19. Government Orders Privilege 4 statements
  20. Government Orders Military Justice System Modernization Act 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Government Orders 2 statements
  22. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 61 statements
  24. Oral Questions The Environment 4 statements
  25. Oral Questions Aerospace Industry 2 statements
  26. Oral Questions Taxation 8 statements
  27. Oral Questions The Economy 6 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  29. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  30. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  31. Government Orders Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 41 statements