Translate Politics Parliament in plain language.

Business of Supply

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 .

Official text

132 statements

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“The minister has spent an hour avoiding our questions. I want him to answer whether his conflict-of-interest plan applied to this part of the bill.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, it has been more than an hour that the minister has been here, and he has said an awful lot of things but has not answered our questions, and that trend continues. Did the screen that the minister said was necessary to avoid a conflict of interest apply to clause 191 of Bill C-15?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“The minister said it would be a conflict of interest for him to work on this issue. Did this part of the bill involve the project he had a conflict with?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, we take all hon. members at their word in this place, and it was the hon. minister who said there would be a conflict of interest if he were involved in discussions, debates or decisions. Clause 191 contained the High-Speed Rail Network Act. That was Alto-related legislation. Is that true?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“I want the minister to confirm if he voted on February 25 to remove a specific part of this bill.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, on February 25, 2026, the minister voted on Motion No. 44, which would have deleted clause 191 from Bill C-15. Is that correct?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“The minister will not say how he voted on the bill or share his letter about a conflict of interest. He shared that letter with a newspaper. I want him to share it with Parliament.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, it is unbelievable that the minister will not even confirm how he voted on the bill. He will not provide the letter that he wrote in which he said there would be a conflict. We just want to provide transparency for Canadians. If he has nothing to hide, he certainly should be able to provide to members of the House of Commons the letter that he shared with Toronto Star. Why will he not share it?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“The minister set up rules to avoid a conflict of interest with Alto. But his department hired a budget contractor connected to Alto. Did those same rules apply to this contractor?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, the minister told Canadians that he had a conflict of interest screen because he believed there would be one if he participated in debates, discussions, decisions or votes related to Alto, but the minister’s department then hired an outside contractor for the budget who appears to have been connected to Alto. Did a conflict of interest screen apply to that contractor?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“I am just repeating what the minister said. Did Finance Canada hire an outside company to help with the 2025 budget speech and presentation, yes or no?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I have made no allegation. I have only repeated what the minister has said. Regarding what we have asked, and indeed one of the minister’s hon. colleagues asked me to repeat it outside the House, I am asking questions, and the questions are repeating exactly what the minister has said. Therefore, did Finance Canada hire an outside contractor to assist with the 2025 budget speech and presentation, yes or no?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“I want the minister to confirm if the government gave a contractor named Émond over $12,000 to help write the budget speech.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, this is a different question. The question is about a contractor who worked on the budget speech. My understanding is that this is separate from your letter in September. It was a contract worth $12,168. I would encourage you to use your officials who are here in the chamber with you. The contract identified a vendor. The vendor’s last name is Émond, and I am wondering if the minister can confirm that this contract was awarded. It is open-source. It is published online: $12,168 to help with the budget presentation and speech. Can he confirm that?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Michael Barrett

Conservative
“A contractor worked for a company called Alto while also working on the government budget that gave Alto money. I want the minister to answer if this was a conflict of interest, if anything was done to stop it, and if the Ethics Commissioner was told.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, the contractor worked for Alto and then worked on the budget presentation that included details about Alto, and money and implementation legislation for Alto. Does the minister recognize that this is a conflict of interest, and were measures taken to prevent that? Was the Ethics Commissioner informed that this contractor was also concurrently employed by Alto?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Dan Albas

Conservative
“I want to know why the government is buying land for the Alto project before public consultations are done and before the route is chosen.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, the government is already spending money on land acquisition for the Alto project while public consultations are still active. Why are taxpayers paying for the real estate before consultations are even finished and before the final route is even locked in?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Dan Albas

Conservative
“The government plans to buy a lot of land around train stations to build real estate. If a train route changes, who keeps the leftover land and the profits? I want the minister to answer this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I realize the minister has been here for a couple of hours, but he has not answered very many questions, if any. I am hopeful he will answer this one. Internal documents outline a strategy for massive station area land assembly stretching up to two kilometres around a station, explicitly based on the Hong Kong “rail plus property” real estate model. Since his bill, Bill C-15, fails to include land abandonment or buyback provisions, if the route changes in an Ottawa neighbourhood like Eastway Gardens, who keeps the excess land and development profits? Is it the government, Alto or the private consortium?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Dan Albas

Conservative
“I want the minister to tell us the total cost of buying the land, or admit the government does not know the final number yet.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, can the minister provide a total land acquisition cost today or confirm that the Department of Finance does not really have a final number because it is busy appraising entire urban neighbourhoods for real estate portfolios?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Dan Albas

Conservative
“I want a simple yes or no answer. Under this deal, do taxpayers carry all the risk for expropriation and route changes while the private company carries none?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I am not looking for a generational answer. I am just looking for an answer. Under this public-private partnership, do taxpayers carry 100% of the expropriation and route change risk while the private consortium carries zero per cent of that risk? I would like just a simple yes or no.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Dan Albas

Conservative
“I want the minister to answer my question. If the public takes on all the money risks while private developers get guarantees, what risk is the private sector actually taking?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I thought I asked the minister a good question. I guess the minister has a different impression of what answers mean to someone else. If the public takes all the financial gambles on surplus land assembly, and the private sector takes all the development guarantees, what risk is actually private in this partnership? Maybe the minister can answer that.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A– View analysis

Dan Albas

Conservative
“The government is taking more power to collect information from Canadian airports. What are our national airports worth today, and has the government shared that value with Parliament?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, maybe the minister is less touchy about this, so I will turn to airport policy. The government is expanding its information-gathering powers under division 6 of Bill C-30 to include every single airport authority in Canada. What are our national airports worth today, and has a full valuation been provided to Parliament, yes or no?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Dan Albas

Conservative
“How will airports maintain their buildings and runways under this plan? Taking money away from local operators will leave airports short on funds and force travellers to pay huge fees to give private investors a profit.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, since the proceeds of these alternative ownership models are earmarked to be stripped away from local operators and siphoned to the Canada Strong fund, how will our airports maintain their infrastructure when they are being left unintentionally undercapitalized while travellers are hit with massive fee hikes just to satisfy a private investor’s ROI?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“Business investment dropped while the minister was in charge of industry. His policies drove that money away. I want to know if he admits he did anything wrong.”
Official Hansard

I am going to split my time, Mr. Chair. I thank the minister for being here tonight. Before he presents himself as Canada’s economic rescuer, Canadians deserve an accounting. He sat at the cabinet table as industry minister while the investment climate deteriorated in this country. The policies that drove capital away were his policies, so I will ask him quite candidly if he did anything wrong.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade B+ View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“The minister did not answer my question. How much investment money left Canada between 2015 and 2024 while he was in cabinet?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, that is all true, but it does not answer my question. RBC analyzed the full decade from 2015 to 2024, years during which the minister held senior cabinet responsibilities. Can he tell the House the net investment figure in that period? How many net dollars left Canada under his leadership?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“One trillion dollars has left Canada. That is $25,000 for every person. I want to know if the minister thinks that is acceptable.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, that was not my question. The answer for the minister is that one trillion dollars left Canada. According to RBC, that is the single largest sustained capital outflow in Canada’s history. For a country of 40 million people, just to put it into context for those watching at home, that is $25,000 for every person. Does the minister find that acceptable?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“I am asking the minister again because he did not answer. During his 10 years in cabinet, one trillion dollars in business investment left Canada. Does he think that is acceptable?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I will ask the minister the same question again because he did not answer my question. Under his leadership as the minister of industry, during the 10-year period that he was at the cabinet table, a trillion dollars of investment outflow left this country. Does he find that acceptable?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“More investment money left Canada than came in over the last decade. This happened because of the government's bad policies. I want the minister to take responsibility for it.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I will put it into context. For every dollar of foreign investment that came into Canada during that decade, two dollars left this country. It is not because of global issues. It is not because of the tariffs. Tariffs were not an issue then. It is a domestic policy failure that the minister cannot admit he was a part of. Does he accept responsibility, any responsibility, for his role in a trillion dollars leaving this country?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A– View analysis

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 122

All 46 items ·
  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 64 statements
  2. Government Orders Business of Supply 45 statements
  3. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 4 statements
  4. Oral Questions Taxation 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  6. Oral Questions Justice 6 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 16 statements
  8. Oral Questions The Environment 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions Finance 6 statements
  10. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 10 statements
  11. Oral Questions Public Safety 8 statements
  12. Oral Questions Women and Gender Equality 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 6 statements
  14. Oral Questions Natural Resources 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Labour 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions The Environment 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Business of the House 2 statements
  19. Government Orders Government Orders 2 statements
  20. Oral Questions Taxation 4 statements
  21. Oral Questions Emergency Management 3 statements
  22. Government Orders Business of Supply 15 statements
  23. Government Orders Business of Supply 15 statements
  24. Government Orders Business of Supply 27 statements
  25. Private Members' Business An Act to repeal certain restrictions on shipping 12 statements
  26. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  27. Government Orders Business of Supply 366 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements