This was a Business of Supply debate taking place during consideration of the government’s recent economic update legislation. Conservatives pressed the Finance Minister on deficit spending, asking when the budget would be balanced, how many homes are being built, the costs of a planned sovereign wealth fund, and details of specific spending items such as a spaceport lease, while repeatedly saying the minister was not answering their questions. Liberals defended the government’s record, saying the economy is strong, the deficit is lower than expected, and housing prices and rents have come down. The Bloc Québécois asked about the exemption of American companies from the global minimum tax in Bill C-31 and about wage subsidies for workers affected by tariffs, and the NDP asked why the government is not taxing oil company excess profits or banning surveillance pricing. Some members also raised local matters such as support for regional media.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .
“Does the minister really agree with the Prime Minister that life is affordable? Groceries cost $1,000 more this year, and 2.2 million Canadians are using food banks.”
“Madam Chair, does the minister agree with the Prime Minister that affordability is the best it has been in a decade, even though grocery prices are up by $1,000 this year and 2.2 million Canadians are going to a food bank?”
Official Hansard
Madam Chair, does the minister agree with the Prime Minister that affordability is the best it has been in a decade, even though grocery prices are up by $1,000 this year and 2.2 million Canadians are going to a food bank?
“The Canadian auto industry is losing thousands of jobs because of U.S. tariffs and bad government choices. The minister spent up to $52 billion to support electric vehicles, but many of those projects failed. I want the minister to admit his plan failed.”
“Madam Chair, the Canadian auto sector is in serious crisis. We are facing thousands of job losses, and really that is a result of the U.S. tariffs and, frankly, a disastrous strategic policy by this Liberal government. If I look at 2020 to 2024, when the finance minister was, in fact, the industry minister, he signed off on up to $52 billion with Ontario for electric vehicle subsidies to artificially manufacture an electric vehicle supply chain in Canada. He made very big promises that this was going to deliver huge returns for Canada, yet many of those projects have failed to deliver. In fact, we have seen thousands of job losses because of the failure of those projects to go forward. Can the minister admit that his electric vehicle strategy has been a failure?”
Official Hansard
Madam Chair, the Canadian auto sector is in serious crisis. We are facing thousands of job losses, and really that is a result of the U.S. tariffs and, frankly, a disastrous strategic policy by this Liberal government. If I look at 2020 to 2024, when the finance minister was, in fact, the industry minister, he signed off on up to $52 billion with Ontario for electric vehicle subsidies to artificially manufacture an electric vehicle supply chain in Canada. He made very big promises that this was going to deliver huge returns for Canada, yet many of those projects have failed to deliver. In fact, we have seen thousands of job losses because of the failure of those projects to go forward. Can the minister admit that his electric vehicle strategy has been a failure?
“The government gave billions of tax dollars to electric vehicle projects that failed, lost jobs, or got delayed. I want the minister to tell us if he thinks he kept his promises on electric vehicles.”
“Madam Chair, yes I am, with the member for St. Albert—Sturgeon River. I will just go through the list, because I think the finance minister may not be aware of some of the commitments that he made to Canadians that have since fallen through. At Stellantis in Brampton, the plant laid off 3,000 workers. In fact it took those jobs, sent them to the U.S. and promised 5,000 jobs in the U.S. and $13 billion of U.S. investment, despite hundreds of millions of dollars flowing from the taxpayers through the Liberal government to retool Stellantis’s facility in Brampton. Northvolt in Quebec went bankrupt despite up to $3 billion of commitments from the taxpayer through the Liberal government. Ford in Oakville, despite millions of taxpayer dollars spent, cancelled its project and is now making gas-powered trucks. With Umicore for EV batteries in Loyalist Township, Ontario, millions of taxpayer dollars were spent, and the project was delayed indefinitely. GM POSCO in Quebec is an EV battery plant. Phase 2 is now delayed despite well over $126 million from the taxpayer being spent. GM’s CAMI facility is in Oshawa with $244 million from the taxpayer. Their BrightDrop EV project was shelved. Of course, Honda just recently suspended indefinitely a $15-billion electric vehicle project in Ontario, citing issues with global EV demand. The Liberals’ cornerstone, the NextStar Energy facility that was supposed to build and be a world leader in electric car batteries, is no longer making EV batteries. In fact, the auto company involved with that, Stellantis, has pulled out altogether. I will just ask the minister again if he feels his promises are being delivered on an electric vehicle supply chain in Canada?”
Official Hansard
Madam Chair, yes I am, with the member for St. Albert—Sturgeon River. I will just go through the list, because I think the finance minister may not be aware of some of the commitments that he made to Canadians that have since fallen through. At Stellantis in Brampton, the plant laid off 3,000 workers. In fact it took those jobs, sent them to the U.S. and promised 5,000 jobs in the U.S. and $13 billion of U.S. investment, despite hundreds of millions of dollars flowing from the taxpayers through the Liberal government to retool Stellantis’s facility in Brampton. Northvolt in Quebec went bankrupt despite up to $3 billion of commitments from the taxpayer through the Liberal government. Ford in Oakville, despite millions of taxpayer dollars spent, cancelled its project and is now making gas-powered trucks. With Umicore for EV batteries in Loyalist Township, Ontario, millions of taxpayer dollars were spent, and the project was delayed indefinitely. GM POSCO in Quebec is an EV battery plant. Phase 2 is now delayed despite well over $126 million from the taxpayer being spent. GM’s CAMI facility is in Oshawa with $244 million from the taxpayer. Their BrightDrop EV project was shelved. Of course, Honda just recently suspended indefinitely a $15-billion electric vehicle project in Ontario, citing issues with global EV demand. The Liberals’ cornerstone, the NextStar Energy facility that was supposed to build and be a world leader in electric car batteries, is no longer making EV batteries. In fact, the auto company involved with that, Stellantis, has pulled out altogether. I will just ask the minister again if he feels his promises are being delivered on an electric vehicle supply chain in Canada?
“Car companies are losing billions of dollars on electric vehicles because people are not buying them. Why is the government still spending billions of tax dollars on them?”
“Madam Chair, I do believe Volkswagen has written down $6 billion because of losses in electric vehicles. These CEOs are really showing what the market is demanding, and that is not electric vehicles. If we look at Stellantis, for example, it wrote down $26 billion on EV investments. Stellantis cited that its customers were not buying them, and that is why it just could not make a profit from EVs. Just in January, GM, which also received subsidies from the Liberal government and the taxpayer, announced $6 billion of write-downs as well on EV operations. They warned that more EV writedowns may be happening. In December, Ford announced nearly $20 billion of writedowns. It just keeps coming on EV productions. After years of trying to make them profitable, they are just not profitable. Again, how can the minister stand here and say that the government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars and committed billions more, yet the CEOs themselves are saying that they cannot make a profit with these EVs?”
Official Hansard
Madam Chair, I do believe Volkswagen has written down $6 billion because of losses in electric vehicles. These CEOs are really showing what the market is demanding, and that is not electric vehicles. If we look at Stellantis, for example, it wrote down $26 billion on EV investments. Stellantis cited that its customers were not buying them, and that is why it just could not make a profit from EVs. Just in January, GM, which also received subsidies from the Liberal government and the taxpayer, announced $6 billion of write-downs as well on EV operations. They warned that more EV writedowns may be happening. In December, Ford announced nearly $20 billion of writedowns. It just keeps coming on EV productions. After years of trying to make them profitable, they are just not profitable. Again, how can the minister stand here and say that the government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars and committed billions more, yet the CEOs themselves are saying that they cannot make a profit with these EVs?
“The electric vehicle market is failing and Canadian autoworkers are losing their jobs. The government wants to spend 2.3 billion dollars on electric car subsidies. Most of that money will help American car makers, not Canadian workers. I want the minister to explain why.”
“Mr. Chair, if we listen to the CEOs who are writing down up to $25 billion because of EV losses and if we look at the thousands of job losses at the Brampton facility and the CAMI facility, I think it is very clear the EV market in North America is struggling. That is despite billions of dollars of promises from the Liberal government and hundreds of millions of dollars flowing. They are still struggling to make a go of it. We see in North America that EVs do not really sell unless they are receiving huge subsidies from the taxpayers, so that is exactly what the Liberals are doing. They are doubling down on this failing strategy and have brought forward a $2.3-billion EV subsidy so that Canadian taxpayer dollars can go to those purchasing electric vehicles. However, the reality is a lot of that money is not going to benefit the Canadian auto sector, which is struggling and needs the support. No, It is going to go to foreign-made electric vehicles, because Canada, despite all these promises and all this money, makes one, maybe two, eligible vehicles. How is it that our auto sector is struggling, we are losing thousands of jobs, and the finance minister has brought forward a $2.3-billion subsidy that will largely go to benefit Donald Trump’s American auto sector? How is he justifying benefiting the Trump auto sector when our auto sector needs the support?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, if we listen to the CEOs who are writing down up to $25 billion because of EV losses and if we look at the thousands of job losses at the Brampton facility and the CAMI facility, I think it is very clear the EV market in North America is struggling. That is despite billions of dollars of promises from the Liberal government and hundreds of millions of dollars flowing. They are still struggling to make a go of it. We see in North America that EVs do not really sell unless they are receiving huge subsidies from the taxpayers, so that is exactly what the Liberals are doing. They are doubling down on this failing strategy and have brought forward a $2.3-billion EV subsidy so that Canadian taxpayer dollars can go to those purchasing electric vehicles. However, the reality is a lot of that money is not going to benefit the Canadian auto sector, which is struggling and needs the support. No, It is going to go to foreign-made electric vehicles, because Canada, despite all these promises and all this money, makes one, maybe two, eligible vehicles. How is it that our auto sector is struggling, we are losing thousands of jobs, and the finance minister has brought forward a $2.3-billion subsidy that will largely go to benefit Donald Trump’s American auto sector? How is he justifying benefiting the Trump auto sector when our auto sector needs the support?
“The minister did not explain why Canadian tax dollars are helping the American electric vehicle market. Now the government is letting in 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles. This will hurt our own auto workers, who cannot compete with heavily subsidized Chinese cars.”
“Mr. Chair, it is not necessarily other countries creating electric vehicle subsidies that benefit the American EV auto sector. Again, I do not understand. The minister did not answer my question about why our taxpayer dollars are going to benefit the American electric vehicle market when our auto sector needs support. He did not answer that at all, but we will move on. It is very clear that the government is going to keep doubling down, but what is really shocking is that, despite all the struggles he is having in getting this electric vehicle strategy off the ground and despite billions of dollars that the government is trying to get out the door to attract this investment, the minister is bringing in 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles, which will represent a third of the electric vehicle market in this country. We cannot hope to compete with the subsidies that China provides. How can he justify this when our auto sector is struggling?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, it is not necessarily other countries creating electric vehicle subsidies that benefit the American EV auto sector. Again, I do not understand. The minister did not answer my question about why our taxpayer dollars are going to benefit the American electric vehicle market when our auto sector needs support. He did not answer that at all, but we will move on. It is very clear that the government is going to keep doubling down, but what is really shocking is that, despite all the struggles he is having in getting this electric vehicle strategy off the ground and despite billions of dollars that the government is trying to get out the door to attract this investment, the minister is bringing in 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles, which will represent a third of the electric vehicle market in this country. We cannot hope to compete with the subsidies that China provides. How can he justify this when our auto sector is struggling?
“The government signed a $200-million lease for a spaceport and backdated it by a full year. I want to know why.”
“Mr. Chair, in March, the Liberals entered into a $200-million lease for a so-called spaceport with a company called Maritime Launch Services. The lease was backdated by one full year to April 1, 2025. Why?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, in March, the Liberals entered into a $200-million lease for a so-called spaceport with a company called Maritime Launch Services. The lease was backdated by one full year to April 1, 2025. Why?
“Why did the Liberals give Maritime Launch Services $20 million for no work by backdating a lease to April 2025?”
“Mr. Chair, in backdating the lease to April 2025, the Liberals handed Maritime Launch Services $20 million for no work and no value to taxpayers. Why?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, in backdating the lease to April 2025, the Liberals handed Maritime Launch Services $20 million for no work and no value to taxpayers. Why?
“The lease was backdated to April 2025. An audit showed that Maritime Launch Services was close to going bankrupt. Did the government backdate the lease to bail out this failing company?”
“Mr. Chair, the lease was backdated to April 2025. An independent auditor’s report revealed that Maritime Launch Services was not a going concern and that they were on the verge of bankruptcy. Is the real reason the lease was backdated to bail out a nearly bankrupt company? Is that not what happened?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, the lease was backdated to April 2025. An independent auditor’s report revealed that Maritime Launch Services was not a going concern and that they were on the verge of bankruptcy. Is the real reason the lease was backdated to bail out a nearly bankrupt company? Is that not what happened?
“The government is paying a company $20 million a year to lease land that the company rents from Nova Scotia for less than $14,000. This company has never launched anything into space. Is this a good use of money?”
“Mr. Chair, the answer is zero. They have zero track record of launching anything into space. The Liberals are paying Maritime Launch Services $20 million a year to lease land that Maritime Launch Services does not even own, which they are leasing from the Province of Nova Scotia for less than $14,000 a year. They are then flipping it to the federal government, earning a 1,300% profit. Is that value for money, yes or no?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, the answer is zero. They have zero track record of launching anything into space. The Liberals are paying Maritime Launch Services $20 million a year to lease land that Maritime Launch Services does not even own, which they are leasing from the Province of Nova Scotia for less than $14,000 a year. They are then flipping it to the federal government, earning a 1,300% profit. Is that value for money, yes or no?
“I want the minister to explain why we bought land back from a failing space company for 13 times what it paid.”
“Mr. Chair, to review the inconvenient facts for the minister, we have a nearly bankrupt company that has no track record of launching anything into space flipping Crown land back to the taxpayers for a 1,300% profit. How does any of that make sense?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, to review the inconvenient facts for the minister, we have a nearly bankrupt company that has no track record of launching anything into space flipping Crown land back to the taxpayers for a 1,300% profit. How does any of that make sense?
“I want to know if this company got special treatment because its lobbyist worked for the justice minister and a former Liberal premier is on its board.”
“Mr. Chair, is it a coincidence that the formal Liberal premier of Nova Scotia sits on the advisory board and the chief lobbyist is none other than a former senior staffer to the current Minister of Justice? How else does a nearly bankrupt—”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, is it a coincidence that the formal Liberal premier of Nova Scotia sits on the advisory board and the chief lobbyist is none other than a former senior staffer to the current Minister of Justice? How else does a nearly bankrupt—
Loses points more than most for Unearned certainty×2.0
Michael Barrett, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes
ConservativeCon
“The minister wrote a letter to the Prime Minister saying he would be in a conflict of interest if he worked on the Alto project. I want him to confirm if that is true.”
“Mr. Chair, on September 10, 2025, the minister wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, saying that if he were involved in any decisions, discussions or debates related to the Alto project, he would be in a conflict of interest. Is that correct?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, on September 10, 2025, the minister wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, saying that if he were involved in any decisions, discussions or debates related to the Alto project, he would be in a conflict of interest. Is that correct?
Loses points more than most for Unearned certainty×2.0
Michael Barrett, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes
ConservativeCon
“I want the minister to release the letter he wrote in September 2025. I want him to give it to the House and to the ethics committee when he speaks to them on June 11.”
“Mr. Chair, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna. The question is about the letter the minister wrote in September 2025. Will the minister table that letter in the House, and at the ethics committee when he appears on June 11?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna. The question is about the letter the minister wrote in September 2025. Will the minister table that letter in the House, and at the ethics committee when he appears on June 11?
Loses points more than most for Unearned certainty×2.0
Michael Barrett, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes
ConservativeCon
“I want the minister to admit he had to step away from decisions about Alto because he had a conflict of interest.”
“Mr. Chair, this evening the minister has the opportunity to inform Canadians and the House about the conflict of interest he said he would be in if he participated in votes, decisions, discussions or debates on Alto. This is why the minister put in place a conflict of interest screen. Is that not correct?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, this evening the minister has the opportunity to inform Canadians and the House about the conflict of interest he said he would be in if he participated in votes, decisions, discussions or debates on Alto. This is why the minister put in place a conflict of interest screen. Is that not correct?
Loses points more than most for Unearned certainty×2.0
Michael Barrett, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes
ConservativeCon
“The minister should share his conflict of interest letter with Parliament, especially since he gave it to the media. I want to know why his ethics rules did not stop him from taking part in decisions about Alto.”
“Mr. Chair, it was the minister who said there would be a conflict of interest. The letter the minister provided to the Prime Minister should be furnished. Because we know it was shared with media, it should certainly be shared with parliamentarians. Why did the ethics screen the minister put in place not prevent him from participating in discussions, decisions, debates or votes related to Alto?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, it was the minister who said there would be a conflict of interest. The letter the minister provided to the Prime Minister should be furnished. Because we know it was shared with media, it should certainly be shared with parliamentarians. Why did the ethics screen the minister put in place not prevent him from participating in discussions, decisions, debates or votes related to Alto?
Loses points more than most for Unearned certainty×2.0
Michael Barrett, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes
ConservativeCon
“The minister said himself that there would be a conflict of interest. Did his conflict-of-interest screen stop him from talking about Alto in cabinet meetings?”
“Mr. Chair, It was the minister who said there would be a conflict of interest. Those were his words. Did that screen prevent the minister from participating in discussions about Alto in cabinet?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Chair, It was the minister who said there would be a conflict of interest. Those were his words. Did that screen prevent the minister from participating in discussions about Alto in cabinet?
