Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30

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

The debate was on a motion to stop further adjournment of debate on Bill C-30, the Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act, which includes tax measures such as changes to the labour deduction for tradespeople, a temporary cut to the excise tax on gasoline and diesel, and changes to employment insurance, the Canada Pension Plan and other laws. Liberal members said the bill funds priorities like trade unions, a sovereign wealth fund and small craft harbours, and argued that a roughly 30-hour delay at the finance committee meant it was time to vote. Conservative members said they were not stalling but asking necessary questions in committee, that the bill changes many laws and needs more study, and objected to the government limiting debate in a minority Parliament. Elizabeth May also spoke against the routine use of time allocation and raised concerns about parts of the bill not covered in the economic plan, such as pesticide rules.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

2 statements

Marilène Gill, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan

Bloc Québécois
“The government is bad at managing its time and is rushing our debates. It acts like a dictator by cutting our work short. If it organized its schedule better, we would not have to hurry through our business at the end of every session.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I must say that this is fascinating. I too am a member of the opposition in the House and have been for 11 years. As my colleague said earlier, the Conservatives have been in opposition for 11 years. The Bloc Québécois will always be in opposition. The opposition is necessary. The opposition stops the government from becoming a dictatorship, although it has been acting like a dictator in committee ever since it secured its majority and got to set the agenda. We are also seeing dictatorial behaviour in the House, where the government wants to cut our debates short. I think that there is a fundamental problem in the House, and I have been experiencing it for 11 years: The government has a hard time managing its legislative agenda. If it were more organized, we would not be forced to rush through business at the end of every session under the threat of not being able to go home. I think that this is disrespectful to the public. They do not expect us to rush through our work. They expect us to manage our time properly. Take today, for example. If we had simply started with Bill C-9 this morning and debated Motion No. 12 after question period, we would have saved two hours. That would have given the government two extra hours for its legislative agenda. In my opinion, the government is having a hard time being efficient. We were discussing heat recovery earlier. If only we had a time recovery system, we could be more productive not only for all members of the House, but also for the public. That would be nice. I offer that as food for thought for my colleague across the aisle.

Jean-Denis Garon, Mirabel

Bloc Québécois
“The government is cutting off debate on this bill. In committee, the Liberals refused to accept any changes from other parties because they have a majority. They are ignoring the opposition and making all the decisions themselves.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am not sure there is any point in asking my colleague a question. He is just going to stand like he did before and say that the government has a job to do for Canadians and that it is going to do that job, whether it was elected to do it or not. I would like to remind him that we debated another time allocation motion not so long ago. At the time, I was asking questions of the minister responsible for Canadian heritage, who was defending that time allocation motion. I explained to him that, ever since the Liberals got a majority, they have been using it to hold in camera meetings at the expense of Driver Inc. victims and to quash investigations into the conflicts of interest of the Minister of Finance and his wife. Do members know what the Minister of Canadian Heritage said to me at the time? He asked me whether I thought he wanted to be here, because he had been forced to come and defend something that is indefensible. I will conclude my comments by saying that I serve on the Standing Committee on Finance and that I participated in the study of Bill C-30. As soon as the Conservative Party presented its first amendment, the Liberals clearly indicated that they were going to oppose any and all amendments because they have a majority. They did not even wait an hour to make that clear. They said it in the very first minute of the meeting. The Liberals were asking for a special report on specific changes to the Canada pension plan. I tried to negotiate a solution myself. Officials told us it was doable, but the Liberals refused. The reality is that the government is trying to curtail debate, whether it is a minority or a majority. Circumstances do not matter, and this government has decided that it will make all the decisions. According to the government, in a democracy, the opposition serves no function. I will say it again: I think Parliament is better than what the Liberals are doing with it.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 136

  1. Private Members' Business Income Tax Act 14 statements
  2. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 32 statements
  3. Government Orders Government Orders 20 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  5. Oral Questions Government Priorities 6 statements
  6. Oral Questions The Economy 15 statements
  7. Oral Questions Climate Change 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Seniors 6 statements
  9. Oral Questions Access to Information 6 statements
  10. Oral Questions Artificial Intelligence 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 11 statements
  12. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Public Safety 6 statements
  14. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Public Safety 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 4 statements
  17. Oral Questions Taxation 8 statements
  18. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 31 statements
  19. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 50 statements
  20. Government Orders Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 41 statements
  21. Government Orders Combatting Hate Act 37 statements
  22. Government Orders Combatting Hate Act 38 statements