“The government makes many housing announcements, but it builds very few homes. Housing is still too expensive, and many Canadians cannot afford to buy a home. I want the member to explain why the government failed to deliver on its plan.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member talked about so many announcements. There is a large number of announcements, but the result is very small. It is a fraction of the amount of housing needed for Canada. Housing prices are still high and still unaffordable. A lot of Canadians are leaving this dream behind. What can the hon. member can tell Canadians about the result of the government’s not delivering the plan it put in place?”

“The Prime Minister says life is affordable, but 2.2 million people use food banks each month, including over 700,000 children. I want the member to admit that the government's programs caused this affordability crisis.”

“Mr. Speaker, I was really glad to hear the member opposite say that he recognizes there is an affordability challenge, although it is contradictory to what the Prime Minister recently said in the House, which was that affordability is the best it has been in a decade. We are not quite sure what it is. The member said he is proud of the national food security strategy and the concrete action that is being provided. When we look at food, there are 2.2 million people lining up at food banks each month. Is he proud of that, or the 700,000-plus children using food banks? Is he proud of the interest on our national debt, which now has payments exceeding transfers for health? Will he acknowledge that the government’s programs, despite their nice-sounding names, have put Canada into an affordability crisis and—”

“I want the House to pass our motion on the cost of living. After 11 years of Liberal government, life has become too expensive. Liberal rules like the industrial carbon tax, clean fuel rules, electricity regulations, and the plastic packaging ban make energy, shipping, and food cost more. These costs hurt seniors, rural families, and low-income Canadians the most. The Liberals need to admit their policies are raising prices and vote with us.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Red Deer. I am pleased to rise on behalf of my price-conscious constituents of the fall foliage-filled riding of Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke. The motion before us today simply asks that we recognize reality. Reality is that the Liberals have been in power 11 years. Reality indicates that we have an affordability crisis. Our Liberal colleagues would prefer we ignore reality. They prefer the fantasy world in which they are now a new government. They prefer that Canadians forget that higher prices are the official policy of the Liberal Party. The Liberals want to send the Trudeau years down the memory hole, but Canadians are living with the consequences of 11 years of bad Liberal policy. When it comes to affordability, there are four bad Liberal policies that truly stand out. The first is the industrial carbon tax, the second is the new fuel standard, the third is the plastic packaging ban for food and the fourth is the Liberal electricity regulations. Liberals will insist that, taken in isolation, each policy is done with the best of Liberal intentions. The road to higher prices is paved with Liberal intentions. The Liberals will claim that the purpose of the industrial carbon tax is to reduce emissions. What they do not tell us is that the consequence of the carbon tax is higher prices. Canadians understand that carbon taxes increase prices. Every Canadian saw first-hand the impact that eliminating the consumer carbon tax had on gas prices. The only difference between the consumer carbon tax and the industrial carbon tax is visibility. Most Canadians do not pay for the industrial carbon tax directly. It is paid indirectly, and the costs are absorbed first by employers. Companies have to pass those costs along to consumers if they can. Some companies will not be able to raise prices, because of foreign competition. That is why the Liberal Prime Minister even promised carbon tariffs. As all Canadians know, tariffs increase the price of everything. The point of the Prime Minister’s promised carbon tariff is to allow those companies paying the industrial carbon tax and facing foreign competition to raise prices. Before my Liberal colleagues start howling in outrage, I want to be clear: The Prime Minister has not imposed his promised carbon tariffs yet, and I have never met a Liberal prime minister who has not been prepared to break a promise in the face of poor polling. Canadians should note that the Liberals’ favourite defence of the industrial carbon tax is to claim that if we do not penalize our companies with a carbon tax, our European allies will violate our trade agreements and impose carbon tariffs on our exports. Given Europe’s current energy crisis and growing debt concerns, our European friends are in no position to impose carbon tariffs, yet the Liberals will continue to repeat that carbon tax talking point. They will say with a straight face that Europe will tariff us. At the same time, they claim to be expanding free trade with Europe because we can trust it not to tariff us. The deeper irony is that the industrial carbon tax has the same impact on our exports as the U.S. tariffs do. Tariffs and taxes increase prices. It is the same as the other bad Liberal policy I mentioned, the Liberal fuel standard. Just as with the carbon tax, the Liberals claim that the intention behind the fuel regulations is to reduce emissions. The impact, though, is to increase prices on fuels. Yesterday, the Liberals voted against our emergency fuel relief plan. It is part of a pattern with the Liberals. They vote to increase prices at every turn but then vote against any action to reduce costs for Canadians. They even had the audacity to call their legislation that hikes gas taxes in the middle of winter a fuel affordability bill. The only thing more cynical than that piece of gaslighting is the Liberals’ rebranding the GST credit as the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. When Mulroney brought the GST to tackle the first Trudeau deficit, his government established the GST credit and made sure not to apply the GST on most groceries and essentials. Stealing Conservative policies has become stock and trade with the Liberals, and if they actually adopted our policies faithfully, I would sing their praises, but they never do. They always have to put their own Liberal spin on it. With the GST credit, they increased the payment by 25%. That increases demand, and given the name change to the credit, the Liberals want increased demand to go toward groceries, and that means even more grocery inflation. At the same time, the Liberals are pursuing their policy to ban 90% of plastic packages in the grocery store. Switching from plastic bottles to glass bottles would increase prices and reduce supply. A truck filled with glass jars of peanut butter will carry less peanut butter than if it were in plastic jars. Maybe our economist Prime Minister should explain to Canadians what happens when he increases demand and reduces supply. The Liberal intention behind their plastic packaging ban is to reduce plastic pollution. The road to higher prices is paved with Liberal intentions. Bad Liberal policies are raising the prices of industrial goods, diesel, gasoline, everything that is made or shipped, and, worst of all, the price of food. Of course we need to give an honourable mention to the Liberal plan to increase the price of electricity with the constitutionally dubious clean electricity regulations. It will not surprise me if my Liberal colleagues try to defend these policies individually. Their first impulse will be to deny and deflect. They will claim that the policy is not raising prices, and then they will point to $10-a-day day care, which is not $10 and is not available to many of our most marginalized families. The problem for the Liberals is something called the Canada Gazette. That is where they must publish their regulations and, most importantly, tell Canadians the truth. That is where Canadians can see in black and white that the Liberal regulations increase prices. Most important, even if they reveal the impact of higher Liberal prices, it is not shared equally among Canadians. Lower-income Canadians are hit hardest. Rural Canadians and seniors are hit hard. For lower-income seniors in rural communities, its hits compound. The upper-income urban progressives can afford the luxury of paying for Liberal intentions. What the Liberals should not be doing is passing the higher cost onto those who can least afford it. Of course, if they do not deny and deflect, they will try to diminish the impact. Today they might claim the Liberal fuel standard has increased the price of gasoline by only five cents a litre, and they will ignore the PBO report that proves the cost will reach 17¢ per litre by 2030. Whether it is for gasoline, diesel or electricity, every extra penny of the cost of energy cascades through the economy. Five cents a litre might not sound like much. It might not sound economically crippling for the average urban commuter, but what about the lakers, those ships on the Great Lakes that take iron from northern Ontario to be smelted into steel in southern Ontario? The lakers carry well over 500,000 litres of marine diesel. The Liberal fuel standards means they are paying over $34,000 more to fill up that ship. They pass those costs on to the steel plant. The steel plant passes those costs and their own extra costs onto the primary parts makers. The parts makers pass those costs on plus their extra costs to the appliance manufacturer. Those appliances are loaded onto trucks powered by diesel and shipped to the retailer. Sitting at the bottom of that cascade is every single consumer. Only Conservatives are proposing positive policies to reduce energy prices. We are fighting for the cascade of lower prices. We want policies to increase supply, not demand. We need policies that will increase competition, not more protectionism. We need broad-based tax reform, not gimmicky megadeductions. Most of all, we need every Liberal member to follow the advice of their leader, to look inside themselves. They need to ask if their intentions are aligned with the impact they will have on Canadians. Higher prices are the official policy of the Liberal Party, and Canadians can see the results after 11 years of Liberal rule. Housing, energy and food have become more expensive. Bad Liberal policies and out-of-control spending have led us to this affordability crisis. The road to recovery starts with the Liberals’ admitting they have a problem, by supporting our Conservative motion.”

“I would only like this budget if Conservatives wrote it. Liberal programs have hidden costs that regular people end up paying for, even when the government claims to save them money.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would really like the budget if it came from Conservatives, because then there would not be the drawbacks and the little hidden costs that every consumer pays every time the Liberals put forth a program that is supposedly going to save them money.”

“People with disabilities are hurt the most by high prices, but I do not support a basic income for everyone. In my riding, 30,000 people do not have a doctor, so it is hard for them to get medical forms filled out. Anyone who already qualifies for the disability tax credit should automatically get the disability benefit without applying twice.”

“Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities are often the most hard hit by any consumer prices. However, I do not believe in a universal basic income in addition to what we already have. With respect to the disability tax credit application, there are 30,000 people in my riding who do not have a doctor. It is even hard to get a nurse practitioner and people are on a waiting list. Therefore, it is very difficult to get that form filled out in the first place. What I agree with is this: If somebody qualifies for the disability tax credit, they should not have to go through all the motions to obtain the disability benefit as well.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“Seniors are hurt the most by high costs, especially in rural areas where people must drive. We have no buses, so seniors without cars must pay high taxi fares just to buy food or see a doctor. Fuel costs keep going up because of the carbon tax and other Liberal taxes.”

“Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with the member that seniors are the hardest hit. Seniors living in rural communities are even harder hit because they have to drive even to get groceries. Seniors who do not have a vehicle, if they have to take a car to the grocery store or to the doctor’s office, or for anything that has to be done outside their home, have to take a taxi as we do not have buses. In our community, that sometimes costs $40 just to go to the bank and another $40 to get back. The cost of fuel keeps going up for taxi drivers, so every trip costs more because of the increasing price of fuel due to the carbon taxes and all the other taxes the Liberals keep on increasing.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 44 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“Hard-working taxpayers already pay for their homes, insurance, and taxes. The government disrespects them by telling them to be grateful for rebate cheques.”

“Mr. Speaker, a taxpayer gets up in the morning, goes to work, pays taxes, pays the mortgage and pays insurance, and then gets a lecture from Ottawa as to how grateful they should be when they get a rebate cheque. Have we completely lost the plot? Is this how we show respect to our taxpayers?”

“The government taxes people too much. They take money from our paycheques, when we buy things, and even when we try to save.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is the typical giving with one hand and taking with the other. However, in this case, with the Liberals, it is take, take, take. They take money off the paycheques, they take money when we buy something and they take it no matter what we do. It is very difficult to save. Even on the money we are saving, they tax us.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“I want the House to vote for our motion saying Canada has an affordability crisis. Food and housing cost too much, and people are taking on too much debt. I blame the government's high taxes, heavy rules, and blocks on energy projects. We want to cut taxes on fuel and approve projects faster to lower costs.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address our Conservative motion calling on this House to recognize that Canada is in an affordability crisis. For workers whose paycheques are barely covering their monthly expenses, families worrying about whether they will be able to provide nutritious food for their kids or even put them in extracurricular activities, low-income seniors whose pensions are dwindling by the day and young people who cannot even dream of ever owning a home, let alone starting a family, this affordability crisis is clear to them. However, unfortunately, to the Liberal government, it seems unclear. For 11 years, the Liberals have been in power, controlling the levers of government spending and implementing policies that have negatively impacted the economy and social fabric of this nation, yet there is always someone or something else to blame but themselves. True leadership means taking responsibility, not passing the buck. After 11 years, the bank is dry. There are no more bucks to be passed. Canadians are living through it every day at the grocery store. “Canada’s Food Price Report 2026“ estimated that a family of four would spend an average of $17,500 on food. That is up nearly $1,000 from the year before. One-quarter of Canadian households are food insecure. That is 2.75 million households, or nearly 10 million people. In Canada, a G7 country, that is a shocking number. In Red Deer, the food bank distributed more than 1.6 million pounds of food in 2025 and helped more than 30,500 families across the region. MNP’s latest consumer debt index found that 54% of Canadians say they “do not have enough savings to support themselves or their family for six months” if they were to lose their job, and 44% of Canadians report “being $200 or less away from financial insolvency each month.” These are not just numbers in reports. There are real Canadians and real people behind these unfortunate statistics, and things are not getting better. Let us talk about housing. Habitat for Humanity reported that 56% of Canadian non-homeowners do not expect to ever own a home. That is the highest number among the 22 countries surveyed. The Liberals have spent 11 years announcing housing plans, but their own agencies keep confirming that nothing is getting built. For young people in Canada, it is even worse. Almost two-thirds are saying housing costs are making it difficult to start a family. The family unit is the backbone of a cohesive and flourishing society. No matter what kind of NGO or special interest group tries to change that, it will always be true. When families are not treated as the base formation of our society pyramid, everything begins to crumble. As more and more young Canadians are struggling to start a family, our social fabric unravels. Canada is then stuck in a feedback loop of endless waves of unaffordability, unemployment and immigration. Rinse and repeat. Affordability, taxes and the cost of living are some of the primary determinants of how many Canadians start a family. It is incumbent on the government to make life more affordable, not less. How does the government make money? Of course, there is no such thing as government money. The answer is taxes. The government collects taxes from Canadians and in turn provides services and protection. That is the basis of the social contract, but the social contract that Canadians are obligated to agree to has been ripped up by the Liberals. Their services are not serving and Canadians do not feel safe. Why is that? Why, after over a decade of the Liberal government, has Canada gone from being the envy of the world to having that reputation reversed? Of course, as Carville famously said, “It’s the economy”. For over a decade, the Liberal government has blocked, stalled, delayed and denied nation-building, enriching and unifying projects. Liberal politics of division and pitting one region against another to score political points have sacrificed Canadian unity and economic prosperity for election results. Canada should have some of the most affordable energy on the planet. We have the resources, we have the workers and we have the know-how. Recently, the Liberals found something else to blame: foreign wars. Here is the truth. Foreign wars and conflicts outside of our borders should not dictate whether Canada could be a self-sustaining energy superpower. It should already have been done. Record fuel costs did not magically appear. They are a result of a government that treats the Canadian energy and natural resource industry as a problem to be managed rather than the advantage it is. The Conservatives would provide emergency prepermitting and tax relief for the construction of refineries, pipelines, rail and storage; eliminate all federal taxes on diesel consumption until at least Canada Day 2027; permanently eliminate taxes on diesel production; and increase production to one million barrels per day so that Canadians are never again dependent on foreign oil. Speaking of buying foreign products, how about buying Canadian? Just yesterday at the health committee, the Liberals made a decision to decimate another Canadian industry. It was the quiet killing of small businesses in a sector millions of Canadians rely on every day. I am speaking of the natural health products industry. For decades, NHPs like vitamins, minerals, probiotics, herbal remedies and traditional Chinese medicines have been regulated and approved by Health Canada. The system worked as intended and the natural health products industry thrived across Canada. It was thriving so much that 80% of Canadians use NHPs. Canadian-owned small businesses like health food stores were growing and thriving. However, in 2023, the Liberal government decided to seize more bureaucratic power and regulate natural health products in the same way as therapeutic drugs manufactured by big pharma and multinationals. That meant more regulations for small businesses, including new labelling, new fees and new penalties. A system that had been functioning properly for decades changed overnight. Canadian products were now required to go through more government, while any product could be purchased over the Internet and shipped into our country with no safety standards or approval. Products are disappearing from Canadian shelves. Customers are ordering from the United States. Jobs are leaving and businesses are closing. The Conservative private member’s bill, Bill C-224, would have reversed the Liberal big government decision and brought NHPs back to the way they were regulated before 2023, when they were working just fine. However, just yesterday, the Liberals unashamedly stripped this bill word by word and will now return a blank piece of paper to this House. Millions of Canadians who rely on natural health products have just been told by the Liberal government, “Too bad”. Pay more or buy American is not pro-Canada, but after 11 years, this is the pattern of the Liberal government. A common-sense bill that would have supported small businesses and consumer choices has been killed by the Liberals. Another main street employer has been told to absorb more cost, making the affordability crisis worse. That is why the Conservatives brought forward this motion today. It is time for the Liberal government members to tell the truth. After 11 years of the Liberal government, Canada is in an affordability crisis. The Conservatives will always fight to save Canadians money. We have an economic action plan to save Canadians money and jobs. We would green-light the 500 projects waiting for approval, take the GST off Canadian-made autos, have zero capital gains on reinvestment in Canada, end the industrial carbon tax and repeal job-killing bills, Bill C-48 and Bill C-69. The Conservatives will fight for common-sense policies that would improve Canadian lives with stronger paycheques, lower food costs, homes Canadians can afford and an economy that rewards hard work. The Liberals must acknowledge the crisis of their making and vote for this Conservative motion.”

• Echo ×25

  A repeated line

  “After 11 years of the Liberal government.”

  Said 25 times by 19 members since April 30.

  Every time it was said →

“The government's plans do not fix high living costs. They just send out one-time cheques instead of offering real solutions. I want the House to use the Conservative plan to help Canadians instead.”

“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been in power for 18 months and yesterday, he said he just got here. For the first time, I heard his parliamentary secretary say we are in an affordability crisis. Every time we talk about these programs, they are band-aids. We need solutions. The Conservatives have put forward a list of things that would make a difference to Canadians, not just a cheque in the mail that is a band-aid.”

“Liberal members shut down our bill to protect natural health products. Most Canadians use these products, and now they will have to pay more for Canadian rules or buy them from the United States. Conservatives will keep fighting for natural health products.”

“Mr. Speaker, this is a very important question. Bill C-224 was shut down yesterday at the health committee and stripped line by line. I felt like we had been misled by the Liberal health committee members. This is truly going to hurt all of the natural health products people. The 80% of Canadians who use these products are going to be forced to either purchase them from the United States at a cheaper rate or pay more to have Canadian labelling and the bureaucracy of Health Canada. I am still reeling from it, but I can assure members that the Conservatives will continue to fight for natural health products, and we will hear more about it in the House when this blank piece of paper that has been worked on since 2023 is presented in the House.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“I want to know how life would be different if the pipeline to the Pacific had been built. I also want to know how long it would take to build it.”

“Mr. Speaker, how would life be different for Canadians had the pipeline to the Pacific that was approved by the Harper government been allowed to proceed? How long is the minimum it would take for that pipeline to be built?”

“If we built pipelines, Canada would control its own fuel prices and farmers would pay less. Pipelines could be built in a few years, but the government's rules and poor planning delay or cancel them. Private companies should build them instead of the government so they get done faster.”

“Mr. Speaker, I have a lot to say about that. The first thing I would like to say is we would be an energy superpower. We would have a stockpile. We would be able to control our fuel prices. Farmers would not be facing twice the price in fuel costs from year to year. The actual building of a pipeline, if the bureaucracy of the Liberal government was not in the way, could be accomplished in a couple of years. The problem is that the Liberals continue to not consult with the provinces and they leave it to the last minute, and the next thing we know, the project is stalled or cancelled. We cannot build pipelines with government money. It needs to be the private sector building these projects, because they will then get done in a reasonable time.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“We have proposed solutions to high costs, but the government voted against them. The government must first admit that its choices over the last 11 years caused this affordability crisis.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member, at the beginning and at the end of his speech, denied a connection between the first part and second part of the motion. He says that the motion could have proposed concrete solutions. We have proposed other concrete solutions, including earlier this week, that they voted against. The first thing toward having a solution is to admit there is a problem. In this motion, we are asking the government to admit that after its 11 years, it has produced an affordability crisis. The member wants to blame external factors as if to say that over the last 11 years, when the government cancelled major projects, and now we need major projects, or imposed a carbon tax and then took it away, the government has not given us the present affordability crisis.”