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

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“Business leaders say government rules are the biggest thing stopping investment in Canada, not tariffs. I want to know if the finance minister agrees.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, does the finance minister know that the single biggest hurtle to investment decisions in this country right now is not tariffs? His own business council, the Business Council of Canada, says it is Canada’s own domestic regulatory burden that is in the way. It is government that is in the way of those investment dollars. Does he agree with any of that?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“We need private investment and major projects to grow the economy and bring in government money. Does the minister agree?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, attracting private investment and advancing major projects is critical to economic growth and government revenues. Will the minister agree with that?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“I want the minister to tell us how long it took the government to build the Trans Mountain pipeline.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, can the minister tell us how long it took for the government to get the TMX pipeline built?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion took five years and went 28 billion dollars over budget. It was built along an existing path. Where did that money go?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, TMX took five years and went over budget five times, by $28 billion Canadian taxpayer dollars, to triple the size of a pipe on a pathway that already had a pipeline. That means no new pipe and no new land. Where did the $28 billion go?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“The last pipeline took five years to build and went $28 billion over budget. The government just made a deal for a new pipeline, but says it will take seven years. Why will it take so long when the world needs energy now?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, it took five years for TMX to get built, and it was $28 billion over budget. The Liberals just announced a memorandum of understanding with the Government of Alberta to build a pipeline that is going to be a projected deliverable seven years from now. Why is that going to take so long if there is an energy emergency around the world?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“I want the minister to tell me if investment in Canada's natural resources has gone up or down since 2015.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, is it the minister’s view that investment in Canada’s resource sector has increased or decreased since 2015?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“Shell bought another company instead of building something new in Canada. How much business money has moved from Canada to the United States in the last five years?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, Shell made an acquisition, not an investment. I will make the minister cite that difference. How much private sector capital has left Canada for U.S. projects over the past five years?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“Does the minister know how long it takes, on average, to approve a major energy or building project in Canada?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, does the minister know how long it actually takes, on average, to approve a major energy or infrastructure project in Canada?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“These projects take five to seven years, and they keep taking longer. The minister does not see this problem. Does this take less time in the United States?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, it takes five, six or seven years. These tracks keep getting longer, and the minister does not seem to recognize that this is the problem. Is that timeline shorter than it is in the United States?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A– View analysis

Greg McLean

Conservative
“Companies are investing in the U.S. and Mexico because projects get built there three times faster than in Canada. I want the minister to tell us if our assessment laws have made it easier or harder to build major projects here.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, that is interesting, because most global CEOs are investing in the U.S. and Mexico, including in infrastructure, where it takes about one-third of the time to get a project built than it does here in Canada. Does the minister believe legislation like the Impact Assessment Act has made it easier or harder to build major projects in Canada?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“The Prime Minister wants to attract $1 trillion in new investment, but $1 trillion left the country under the last industry minister. Will the minister admit this plan is just trying to replace what was lost?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I am going to start off where I left off. The Prime Minister announced a plan to attract $1 trillion of new investment after that former industry minister watched $1 trillion leave this country on his watch. Can the minister admit to Canadians that this is not ambition, but damage control? He is trying to replace what his last government lost. Is that true?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A– View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“The minister celebrates foreign investment in Canada, but not all of it is good. How much foreign investment over the last ten years was just foreign companies buying Canadian companies?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I can see that the minister does not want to admit it or answer my question, so I will talk about foreign direct investment. The minister frequently celebrates Canada’s foreign direct investment numbers, but he knows, as finance minister, that all of those numbers are not created equal. Can he tell the House what share of Canada’s inbound foreign direct investment over the last decade came from mergers and acquisitions, from foreign firms buying Canadian firms?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A– View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“Almost half of these deals are company mergers and buyouts. They do not create new factories, research centres, or jobs. I want the minister to explain to Canadians what they actually do.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I will answer the question for the minister, since he does not want to. The answer is 45%, nearly half. Can the minister explain to Canadians, as the finance minister, what a merger and acquisition actually means in that context? It does not mean a new factory. People at home will know that. It does not mean a new research centre, and it does not mean a new job. What does it mean?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“The finance minister does not understand foreign investment. When foreign companies buy Canadian companies, profits, decisions, and ideas leave Canada without creating new jobs. He should not celebrate this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, that answer is condescending and it does not show that he, as finance minister, understands what foreign direct investment is. It means a foreign company buying a Canadian one. Strategic decisions are moved abroad. The intellectual property moves abroad. The profits move abroad. He knows that as the finance minister. Again, he is treating those in the House like we are stupid. C.D. Howe finds mergers and acquisitions generally do not create new jobs or investments, so why is the minister celebrating in the House the hollowing out of the Canadian economy?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade B+ View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“The best way to measure Canada's economy is how much businesses invest in their workers. I want the minister to tell us if business investment per worker has gone up or down over the last ten years.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, the Minister of Finance knows, and if he does not know, he can ask the officials sitting right in front of him, that the true measure of Canada’s health is the domestic investment. Canadians investing in Canada, businesses investing per worker, is the single best indicator of whether Canadian firms are growing and becoming more productive. He knows this. He is not telling the House this, but he knows it. Can the minister tell us if domestic investment per worker is up or down in the last decade?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative
“Our economy is shrinking, and business investment per worker is down by nearly a third. I want the minister to explain how he can claim our economy is improving.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, what is true is that we have the only shrinking economy in the G7, and the answer is that it is 30% down. If he were truly interested in investing per worker, he would do so, and it has fallen by nearly a third. Stats Canada projects that non-residential capital spending across all industries will grow by less than 2% going forward. Does this sound to the minister like an economy that has turned around or is turning around? It certainly does not sound like that to anyone on this side of the House or anybody watching at home.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade B+ View analysis

Sandra Cobena

Conservative
“Where will Canada get the 25 billion dollars to start its wealth fund? Norway pays for its fund with oil money and extra budget money.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, I will be splitting my time with the member for Calgary East. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund is considered the gold standard, and its success is driven by reinvested budget surpluses and oil and gas revenue. Where is the $25-billion seed money coming from for Canada’s fund?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Sandra Cobena

Conservative
“The minister did not answer my question. We are borrowing 25 billion dollars for this fund, while Norway uses extra cash. Norway also invests all around the world. How will our fund get the best returns without doing that?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, the minister did not answer the question. They will be borrowed funds, $25 billion in borrowed funds, whereas Norway funds it by surpluses. My next question is this: Norway also ensures diversified global investments, so how is this fund expecting the best-in-class returns without global diversification?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Sandra Cobena

Conservative
“The minister did not answer my question about investing in other countries instead of only in Canada. Norway's fund is independent from politicians. How can this Canadian fund be independent if politicians decide what it invests in?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, my question was about diversifying investments. I did not receive an answer. Norway does not, in fact, invest the funds domestically. The minister is proposing exactly the opposite, to invest only in Canada. My next question is this: Norway, which is the best-in-class example, ensures that the fund is free from political interference, so how can the fund be independent if it is prioritizing public interests selected by politicians like himself?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Sandra Cobena

Conservative
“The minister claims politicians will not control this fund, but he also says the government will choose which projects get money. Why did he call it a sovereign wealth fund when politicians will control it?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Chair, on the one hand, the minister is saying it will not have political influence, but then, in the same sentence, he says “we” will ensure that it will be in the national interest, and “we” will decide which projects those will be. The reality is that Norway has zero political influence, and here the fund will have tons. My question to the minister is this. If the fund does not follow any of the traditional pillars of a traditional sovereign wealth fund, why did the minister tell Canadians that in fact it is one?

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