The House debated a Conservative opposition motion on a supply day, focused on government spending and the state of public finances, with the opposition calling for greater accountability over federal finances. Conservatives pointed to the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s findings, arguing the government is borrowing too much, breaking its own fiscal anchors, driving up debt-servicing costs, and hiding debt through budget structures and Crown corporations; they also questioned the military reaching 2% of GDP through reclassified spending and asked how spending could be cut. Liberals said Canada’s finances are strong, noting the country retains a top AAA credit rating, has the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7, is attracting large private investments, and is cutting its deficit; they defended increased spending, including on defence, and argued ministers and parliamentary secretaries already provide accountability at committee without requiring the Prime Minister to appear. Some members also discussed whether LNG Canada should receive public money, a proposal to change pension fund investment rules, and Canada trading with more countries while upholding its values. A Bloc Québécois member said the Prime Minister should appear before committee to answer for his plans, noting his attendance in the House.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .
“It is usually too loud for me to hear the member, and I do not want to miss what he is saying.”
“Mr. Speaker, despite your best efforts to remind people to lower the noise in the chamber, I very rarely hear the voice of the hon. parliamentary secretary. I would hate to miss it this time.”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, despite your best efforts to remind people to lower the noise in the chamber, I very rarely hear the voice of the hon. parliamentary secretary. I would hate to miss it this time.
“Big promises from bankers about climate investing have produced nothing. Meanwhile, Canada has 800 billion dollars in its pension fund that the law says can only be invested for the highest return. I want the government to change this law so our pension money can go to local projects like schools and hospitals instead.”
“Mr. Speaker, I did, of course, notice the investment summit to which my hon. friend, the parliamentary secretary referred, and it is with a sense of déjà vu. The hon. member was not at the Glasgow climate negotiation in 2022, where the Prime Minister was basically the star of the show because he was the special climate envoy for climate finance to the UN Secretary-General. He announced the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, which he pegged at $128 trillion of available investment. Now, this may have a familiar ring to some of us here. Nothing is quite as ephemeral as bankers’ non-binding promises, so that $128 trillion announced as GFANS, as they actually made it an acronym instead of a website, is all that is left of it. The only thing that was net zero was the actual investment that emerged from the $128 trillion. Now, the question I have for my hon. colleague is a precise question: Why will the government not amend the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act? We have real dollars, $800 billion of Canadian pension plan dollars, that right now, by law, can only be used and invested where it gets the best return on investment. To my hon. friend for Winnipeg North, I, in retirement, would like to look down the road at my investment in a local school or a local hospital and not where it went, that $200 million, because the investment board decided it would make more money in Grok developing AI and deepfakes.”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, I did, of course, notice the investment summit to which my hon. friend, the parliamentary secretary referred, and it is with a sense of déjà vu. The hon. member was not at the Glasgow climate negotiation in 2022, where the Prime Minister was basically the star of the show because he was the special climate envoy for climate finance to the UN Secretary-General. He announced the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, which he pegged at $128 trillion of available investment. Now, this may have a familiar ring to some of us here. Nothing is quite as ephemeral as bankers’ non-binding promises, so that $128 trillion announced as GFANS, as they actually made it an acronym instead of a website, is all that is left of it. The only thing that was net zero was the actual investment that emerged from the $128 trillion. Now, the question I have for my hon. colleague is a precise question: Why will the government not amend the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act? We have real dollars, $800 billion of Canadian pension plan dollars, that right now, by law, can only be used and invested where it gets the best return on investment. To my hon. friend for Winnipeg North, I, in retirement, would like to look down the road at my investment in a local school or a local hospital and not where it went, that $200 million, because the investment board decided it would make more money in Grok developing AI and deepfakes.
