Business of Supply

An opposition day motion inviting the Prime Minister to appear at the finance committee, raised during a supply debate on government spending and the economy. Conservatives argued the Prime Minister broke a promise to hold spending growth, that debt interest is the government’s fastest-growing cost and now takes up roughly 14 cents of every dollar of revenue, and that he should come to committee to answer for it. Liberals replied that Canada’s finances are strong, that credit agencies rate the country well, and that government investment in housing, child care, infrastructure and other areas is growing the economy, with a plan to balance day-to-day spending by 2028-29. A Bloc member supported the motion as a low-bar request, and a Green member commented that the government has adopted many Conservative ideas.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

4 statements

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“The Prime Minister has put Canada in a strong financial position to invest in our country. These investments will bring in more money and build a stronger economy. The Conservatives seem to oppose investing in Canadians, such as in natural gas projects. Does the member believe in government investment?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, where I fully agree with the member is on the Prime Minister’s credentials. The Prime Minister has put Canada in a great financial position to look at ways we can invest in Canada and Canadians. In the long term, we will see additional revenues coming in to the federal government. This is part of investing. This is something that is direct. There are many indirect ways in which investing helps. When we listen to the Conservatives, they seem to oppose investing in Canadians to build a stronger, healthier economy. A good example of that is how I was criticized because I made reference to LNG phase two. The Conservatives said the government did not need to invest in that, that it would have happened without the province and the federal government. Does the member believe in government support and investment?

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“The Conservatives try to scare people about Canada's debt. But world experts say our finances are strong, and Canada has a top credit rating like Germany. Our government needs to invest in Canadians and infrastructure. Why do the Conservatives not see the value in investing?”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Clarity 35 of 100

    Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize, as the debate winds down, that as much as the Conservatives try to play on the fear of our deficit and debt situation, experts around the world, whether from the monetary associations or credit rating agencies, have recognized that Canada has good financial capacity. Canada has been given, for example, a AAA credit rating. In the G7, that is something that only Germany can also claim. At the end of the day, we believe that it is important for us to invest in Canadians, in our infrastructure and in so much more. Can the member explain why, as we believe we should be investing, the Conservatives do not recognize the true value of investing?

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Our plan is not failing. Governments of all political parties across Canada see the value in investing in people. Only the far-right Conservatives here in Ottawa oppose it, and that is failing Canadians.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 12 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the point is that the plan is not failing. It is the Conservatives who are failing Canadians by not recognizing that, whether it is the Progressive Conservatives, and I underline “Progressive”, in some provinces, the New Democrats in other provinces or the Liberals in other provinces, many governments and administrations recognize the value of investing in Canadians. It is only the far-right Conservatives here in Ottawa who seem to oppose it. Why?

Doly Begum, Scarborough Southwest

Liberal
“Our economic plan is working. We do not have to choose between managing public money well and helping the economy grow. We are doing both by controlling spending and investing in housing, infrastructure, trade, child care, and school food. In my riding, food bank lines are starting to shrink. We plan to balance our day-to-day spending with our revenue by 2028-29.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the good people of Scarborough Southwest to speak about their stories and, of course, join in debate to discuss our government’s plan, which has made targeted and high-impact investments for Canadians while maintaining the fiscal sustainability that is so necessary for our country right now. I believe I will be able to shed some light on some of the work that we have been doing, and maybe address some of the misconceptions, and the negative energy, frankly, that we hear from the other side every single day. If the Conservatives could just get on board and actually understand the reality of what Canadians are facing every single day, we would be able to work together to actually address some of the challenges that all of us in the House have talked about. We have heard about food banks. Since the pandemic and throughout the last couple of years, we have seen the lines increase at every food bank. In Scarborough, I have seen that myself. Just recently, when I talk to the food banks, they say they are getting to a point where they are seeing the numbers decrease. We are actually finding solutions. We are actually able to help people. We are helping students who used to line up at those food banks and families who used to line up at those food banks. I really hope that we are able to have a discussion where we understand that the Conservatives have really highlighted this debate and made it about fiscal responsibility versus economic growth, as a choice. It is one or the other. I want to say that we need both. We need to have fiscal responsibility, and we also need to have economic growth, not one versus the other. We cannot choose one over the other. That is why it is so important that we are being disciplined, controlled in our measures and focused on that fiscal sustainability. How did our government do that? Let us talk about some of the plans that our government worked on. When we look at our budgets, for example, the way we spend money, something that I have said over the years in my time as a public representative, standing up for the people I represent in my community, is that a budget is a moral document. That means a budget highlights the values that we are focusing on, what we are spending on and what our priorities are. It really is a moral document on how we take care of one another. When we look at the way we have spent and what our government has been focusing on, the number one priority that I see every single day, that I know is important for my community, is a plan to build housing. I see that as a priority for our government, and we are already working on that. Our plan also builds on major infrastructure to transform and connect our economy. We have had Conservatives in government for years, but one of the things we failed to do in the past was to actually connect our provinces and territories to one another. This government made an intentional effort to make sure that we are able to connect our provinces to one another so that we can actually have an economy that functions in a seamless way. It also means that we diversify our trades with countries across the world, make new friends and build capacity. That is exactly what we have done. Another thing that we have done is our plan to lower costs to help families get ahead. That means helping families with our groceries benefit and a child care plan, and focusing on a national school food plan that helps in multiple cities. I know in the city of Toronto, that was something that a lot of schools and a lot of parents appreciated. Canadians expect their government to manage public finances responsibly, and rightly so. Now rising debt servicing costs reinforce that responsibility, because when we look at the rising debt servicing costs, it is about how we are focusing on that responsibility. Fiscal responsibility is not just about balancing a number on the balance sheet, and it is not just about reducing that number and forgetting everything else, which goes back to what I was saying about that choice between fiscal responsibility versus economic growth. It involves making careful choices. It is about making choices today that strengthen our economy for tomorrow. It is about making choices that improve Canada’s ability to stand up for the future and for the children of tomorrow. In our April economic update, the finance minister gave us a clear and transparent account of Canada’s economic performance in an increasingly, if I may remind everyone, uncertain world. It has done two things, I would say. One is that it has given transparency to our businesses, not just small and local businesses but all scales of businesses, so they can seize new opportunities and make sure they are able to thrive. It also helped families. It gave families the confidence to plan for their future. A lot of families were starting to feel that the uncertainties seen around the world were having an impact at home. When we formed government and came into power, within months, families had the confidence to understand how they can move ahead. Yes, it will be tough, and it will get tougher, but we have a plan, and we will work toward making sure we are able to help families move forward. How did we do that? We remained focused and we were disciplined. We focused on what we can control. That means balancing our day-to-day operating spending with revenues by 2028-29 and maintaining our fiscal anchors. We heard many of my colleagues speak to that in the House. We also looked at every dollar spent. It is not the government’s money, but people’s hard-earned dollars. We are responsible for people’s tax dollars, and we are making sure that people’s money is spent on behalf of Canadians to support growth, resilience and their well-being, to make sure they are able to get ahead. We have a responsibility to spend every single dollar in a way that helps Canadians every single day. This is the approach that is very important for those on the other side to understand, especially for today’s debate. Controlling the cost of government while making the investments needed for a stronger economy is what the government has done. It looked at what we could reduce spending on, and we focused on government spending. We looked at how we could build resilience and focus on building a stronger economy for our nation. Our government knows that we cannot just stand still. It is not an option. There cannot be inaction like we have seen in the past. Underinvestment can be detrimental and cost us significantly. I want to focus on one more thing before I conclude. It is really important for us to understand that we are facing a time when people across the country want us to unite and help them. Canada is a country where we take care of one another, and if we are building resilience and a stronger economy, we must come together and make sure we are building an economy that helps our future generations.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 156

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 105 statements
  2. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  3. Oral Questions Housing 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Finance 10 statements
  6. Oral Questions Labour 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 5 statements
  8. Oral Questions Veterans Affairs 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Housing 8 statements
  10. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 6 statements
  11. Oral Questions Government Appointments 4 statements
  12. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 8 statements
  13. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Small Business 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Natural Resources 6 statements
  16. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Marine Transportation 2 statements
  19. Government Orders Business of Supply 41 statements
  20. Oral Questions Natural Resources 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Business of Supply 17 statements
  22. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Committees of the House 2 statements
  24. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 4 statements
  25. Orders of the Day Concurrence in Committee Reports 71 statements
  26. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  27. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements