Business of Supply

The House debated a Conservative supply-day motion about government contracting and procurement, centred on a Canada Revenue Agency security-guard contract awarded to a subsidiary of an American-owned company rather than the Corps of Commissionaires, a non-profit that employs many veterans. Conservatives argued the government should support Canadian employers of veterans, pointed to the winning bid reportedly being $80,000 lower, and also raised veterans’ benefits wait times, Remembrance Day ceremony policies on prayer, the lack of an Afghanistan memorial, and the delayed F-35 fighter jet purchase, which they said would create Canadian jobs. Liberals said the motion used false claims to attack the government, noted that the new company employs thousands of Canadians including in Winnipeg, that only about 20% of Commissionaires are veterans, and that roughly half the workers and about a dozen veterans had been rehired; they pointed to their investments in veterans and defence and defended the independence of arm’s-length procurement agencies. The Bloc Québécois said it supported the motion’s buy-Canadian provision but not its chaplaincy part, which it saw as counter to secularism, and questioned the inclusion of steel, aluminum and lumber without related action; its members also relayed the procurement ombud’s request for more authority to examine contracts.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

93 statements

Blake Richards, Airdrie—Cochrane

Conservative
“The government says it respects veterans, but its actions show the opposite. It restricted prayer at military ceremonies. It gave a 12-million-dollar security contract to an American company instead of Canadian veterans. It also makes veterans wait far too long for their benefits. I want the government to protect veterans' traditions, support their jobs, and give them the help they earned.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as we approach Remembrance Day, Canadians across the country will gather, of course, to honour the men and women who have served this country in our armed forces and who are willing to give of their lives for the freedoms that we all enjoy. In my own communities of Airdrie and Cochrane, I will have the privilege of spending time with veterans, their families and the volunteers who work so hard to make sure their sacrifices are never forgotten. I can tell my colleagues that these are some of the finest people we will ever meet. They are proud of their service and their country. They are not looking for special treatment, but they do expect to be treated with respect and to have a government that gives them what they are owed. Thanking our veterans should not be something we do only once a year. We should not just pin a poppy on our jacket and then forget about them for the other 11 months of the year. These are men and women who stood up for Canada when their country needed them. The very least their government can do for them is to stand up for them when they need it. That is what makes the issues we are discussing here today so frustrating. When we look at the way the Liberal government is treating our veterans, we see a real disconnect between what it says and what it does. Before I get to the very important issue at hand today, I would like to get into a couple of examples that highlight some of the concerns about those differences between the words and the actions of the Liberal government when it comes to showing respect and appreciation for our veterans and what they have done for our country. I think of the issue of military chaplains, for example. For generations, prayer has been a part of military life here in Canada. It has offered comfort to soldiers facing unimaginable circumstances, to families who are grieving their loved ones and to our veterans who are remembering those who never came home. Nobody is suggesting that every Canadian must share the same religious beliefs. Of course not, but surely we can at least respect those who do find strength in their faith, just as we respect those who do not. Instead, the Canadian Armed Forces issued a directive restricting faith-specific prayer at official military functions. In fact, any reflection that might in any way be faith-based or spiritual is banned, and often the messages that a chaplain has to craft almost become meaningless. That is not what anyone would want to see. When I look at that, I have to ask why that is necessary. Our soldiers have faced enemy fire, they have lost their friends and colleagues, they have made sacrifices that most of us will never even be able to comprehend, and now we are telling military chaplains that they cannot even offer a traditional prayer at certain official ceremonies. These are people who have stood beside our troops in their darkest moments. We should be supporting them, not telling them how to practise their faith and not taking away that opportunity for our men and women who serve. Now I will get to the issue of this contract we are discussing today. I find this particularly difficult to understand. Not that long ago, fairly recently, in fact, the government ended the right of first refusal that has existed for the Corps of Commissionaires for decades. I would argue it is important that any Canadian organization or business that employs veterans at an adequate level should have an opportunity for that contract, but at the time the government came out with this, it was a surprise to everyone, including the commissionaires themselves. I remember warning at the time that we could see Canadian veterans lose opportunities and jobs as a result. Here we are, just a few short months later, and we can look at what has happened. It is exactly what we warned would happen by taking away that right of first refusal without replacing it with anything that would guarantee veterans have chances to get those jobs. Here we go. We have a Canadian not-for-profit organization with a long and proud history of providing employment opportunities to veterans. It has helped thousands of former military members transition into civilian life. It has helped them continue to serve their communities and continue to earn a living after leaving the armed forces. However, what the government did was award a nearly $12-million CRA security contract to an American multinational corporation. The difference between the two bids was reportedly less than 1%. Let us think about that for a moment. The government has spent months telling Canadians that we need to buy Canadian, that we need to support Canadian workers and that we need to become our own best customer. Well, here is an opportunity to do exactly that and to be able to support our veterans at the same time. That sounds like it should be a no-brainer, does it not? Apparently, that was not the case for the Liberal government. Our veterans, who have already paid a price for our country, a price most Canadians will never be asked to pay, should not have to keep paying for the failures of the Liberal government. They should not be struggling to afford groceries, worrying about housing or fighting through government bureaucracy just to receive the support they have already earned. They have done their part; it is time the government did its part. We have seen time and again how this works. We have seen significant delays and problematic denials in terms of veterans’ ability to get the services and supports they are entitled to. Veterans often talk about a triple-D policy: denial, delay and death. Essentially, this is because the government has set up a situation where the delays are so long and arduous and the bureaucratic process is so difficult to fight their way through that it ultimately becomes a denial just by delay. Even if it is not that, then it becomes an actual denial. They have to fight through a bunch of other bureaucratic processes, if they can find a way to do that, to hopefully end up getting a positive result in the end. At the end of the day, what the government really seems to hope is that they will just go away and stop fighting for those benefits. They earned them. They deserve them because of what they were willing to do for our country and what they did do for our country. What troubles me about all this is it should not be particularly controversial. Supporting veterans in finding meaningful employment should not be controversial. Respecting the role of faith and tradition in our military should not be controversial. Making sure veterans can afford to live with dignity should not be controversial, yet here we are. Time and time again, the government finds a way to make simple things complicated with more bureaucracy, more excuses and more broken promises. When it comes time to deliver, our veterans are left waiting. Respect for our veterans is not measured by how many wreaths a government lays or how many speeches its ministers give on Remembrance Day; it is measured by what that government does when the cameras are gone, whether it protects their traditions, supports their employment and makes sure they get the help they have earned. This is the standard our veterans deserve and should expect, and it is the standard the Liberal government needs to start being held to. I will continue to stand up for the men and women who have served our country and those who continue to serve our country today. They have earned our gratitude. They have earned our respect. Above all, they have earned a government that is prepared to back up its words with actions, but that is not what they are getting right now. As a Conservative, I will continue to fight for them, and that is what we are doing here today.

John-Paul Danko, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas

Liberal
“Our government is making record investments in our military and veterans. We are spending billions on equipment, housing, recruitment, pay raises, and benefits. I want the member opposite to agree that this is historic support.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as we head into Remembrance Day, I think it is important to put on the record the actual investments this government has made into Canada’s military and veterans, including increases to defence investment and modernization, which was $9 billion just this year, reaching NATO’s 2% of GDP target; historic pay increases for military personnel, including a 20% increase for regular forces privates; a $2.6-billion investment into recruitment and retention, reaching record levels of recruitment in the armed forces; $3.7 billion towards military housing and infrastructure; and an over $200-million investment committed to services and benefits. These are historic investments in Canadians’ military and historic investments to support veterans. Would the member opposite agree?

Blake Richards, Airdrie—Cochrane

Conservative
“The government measures success by how much money it spends, not by real results. Our soldiers still do not have the equipment they need, and veterans still wait months or years for their benefits. The government must end these bureaucratic delays and deliver real results.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, what I find incredibly frustrating is that the only way the Liberal government ever measures anything is how by much money it can can spend. We should instead measure the results and, frankly, the results have not been there. Our men and women in uniform will tell us, to this day, that they continue to struggle with not having the equipment they need to be able to do their jobs. We hear lots of talk about procurement and we hear lots of talk about spending money, but we do not see the results on the ground. When it comes to talking about veterans, whom we are here to talk about today, what they will tell us is they wait months, if not years, for the benefits that they earned because of their service for this country. That is because of the bureaucratic processes put up by that government, and it is time that is put to a stop and we start seeing some results.

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Laurentides—Labelle

Bloc Québécois
“My colleague truly cares about veterans. The government has had nine veterans affairs ministers since 2015, which shows a lack of action. The government acts like veterans are easy to replace, and that hurts them. I want to know if my colleague agrees.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge all the work my colleague did during the year that we served together, as well as the work he did alongside my Bloc Québécois predecessor. My colleague genuinely cares about the treatment of veterans and is deeply committed to recognizing their service. Indeed, my first thought when I joined this committee was to wonder why no action was being taken, even though people wanted what was good for veterans. Since 2015, there have been nine veterans affairs ministers. That says something. Does my colleague agree with me that an announcement like that is deeply hurtful to veterans? The government cannot claim to be supporting veterans when its actions send the message that they are no longer needed and can be readily replaced. Does my colleague agree with me?

Blake Richards, Airdrie—Cochrane

Conservative
“The government is failing our veterans. They delay and deny veterans' benefits. They have not built the monument for the Canadians who died in Afghanistan. They tried to remove wreaths and took away prayer from Remembrance Day services. We must judge them by their actions, not their words.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would agree. We see so many of these kinds of things. We see it in what we are talking about today with this contract, when the Liberals were warned that this would be the result. We see it in the lack of action towards building a monument to the mission in Afghanistan and the 158 Canadians who gave their lives there. We see it in the denials and delays when it comes to the benefits that veterans are entitled to. We see it throughout so many things. We remember that the Liberals tried to take away the Remembrance Day wreaths. They have taken away the ability for prayer at Remembrance Day services. The list goes on and on. I always say we judge someone not by their words but by their actions. If we judge the current government by its actions, it is clearly failing our veterans.

Ellis Ross, Skeena—Bulkley Valley

Conservative
“The government gave a contract to an American company instead of a Canadian veterans group that has been here since 1945. The American company only got it on a technicality by using a Canadian address. I want the member to talk about this technicality and what buying Canadian really means.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we do owe our veterans a debt of gratitude that probably we can never repay. However, we can recognize it in terms of what the federal government has done through the contract that has been issued through a technicality to an American company. The people of Canada have to realize that the only reason this contract was given was that an American company gave a Canadian address but was not located in Canada like the Veterans Association that has been here since 1945. Can the member talk about that technicality, and what it means to buy Canadian?

Blake Richards, Airdrie—Cochrane

Conservative
“The Liberals say they want to buy Canadian, but their actions do not match their words. They failed our veterans and Canadian workers by giving this contract to an American company instead of a Canadian one.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question because the reality of this situation is that not only are the Liberals failing our veterans with this, but they are also failing to live up to their own words. They talk about wanting to see buy Canadian. They want to make sure that Canadians are getting the opportunities. This goes absolutely contrary to all of their words. Again, their actions are not lining up with their words. This was an opportunity not only to do right by our veterans and ensure veterans have the opportunity of employment, but also to ensure that Canadian companies have the opportunity to prioritize Canadian employment over American. In this case, the Liberals failed at all of the above, just like they always do.

Jenna Sudds, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement and to the Secretary of State (Defence Procurement)

Liberal
“I support our policy to buy Canadian goods and services, and I defend the recent contract awarded by the tax agency. That contract was fair and open. The business operates here, pays taxes here, and hires Canadian workers. A Canadian supplier is about who does the work and creates jobs in Canada, not just who owns the company shares.”
  • A repeated line

    “We are going to build the strongest economy in the G7.”

    Said 16 times by 7 members since April 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time today with the member for Compton—Stanstead. It is an honour and a privilege to rise in the House today to reaffirm the Government of Canada’s commitment to the buy Canadian policy. I am incredibly proud of how this initiative is transforming government procurement, giving Canadian businesses, workers, manufacturers and suppliers greater access to opportunities, and delivering real results for Canadians. As the member of Parliament for Kanata, and Canada’s largest technology park with over 800 companies, this policy has a meaningful impact. Our government will always stand with Canadian workers and Canadian businesses, and that is how we will build the strongest economy in the G7. We remain as committed as ever to prioritizing Canadian suppliers and Canadian-made goods and services in federal procurement. This is a pledge that we have made to Canadians, and it is unwavering. Since it came into force in December of last year, the buy Canadian policy has been reshaping how the federal government spends by prioritizing Canadian content, materials, suppliers and workers at every opportunity. From steel and aluminum to wood products, the government’s purchasing of goods and services is being used as a powerful tool to back key industries and strengthen domestic supply chains. The rollout of the buy Canadian policy marked a major step towards building a more resilient Canadian economy. It is designed to ensure clear advantages are available to suppliers who invest, innovate and produce here at home. By prioritizing Canadian suppliers, Canadian materials and Canadian content in federal procurement, we are becoming our own best customer. By reducing reliance on any single trading partner and building resilience through strong domestic demand, we are bolstering Canada’s economy. The policy on prioritizing Canadian suppliers and Canadian content in strategic federal procurements initially applied to procurements valued at $25 million and above. However, in June, we lowered that threshold to $5 million, significantly broadening its reach. We are also putting Canadian materials at the centre of major federal construction and defence projects. For procurements of $25 million or more, the policy requires Canadian-produced steel, aluminum and wood. We are also making it easier for Canadian small businesses to compete for federal opportunities through the small business procurement program, which will simplify procurement processes and introduce new digital tools. Ultimately, the test of this policy is whether federal spending creates economic activity here at home. In the spirit of the buy Canadian policy, the government continues to identify opportunities for Canadian suppliers to benefit from federal procurement policies, and ultimately support Canadian workers, businesses and communities. This includes attracting investments that deliver tangible and lasting benefits to Canadian communities and supply chains. This is all about driving growth, creating opportunities and enhancing prosperity for Canadians. In a more dangerous and volatile world, this has never been more important, particularly when it comes to protecting Canada’s sovereignty. We know that the world has changed and Canada must change with it. That is why Canada is also making generational investments to rebuild, rearm and reinvest in the Canadian Armed Forces. These investments are guided by Canada’s first-ever defence industrial strategy, a whole-of-government approach to transform Canada’s defence industry. This strategy will prioritize Canadian suppliers and materials, invest in Canadian innovation and commercialization, and streamline defence procurement. It is supported by the new Defence Investment Agency. This is yet another tool with which we are delivering greater strategic autonomy and economic benefits for Canada. These efforts are already making a difference. Between December 2025 and October 1, 2026, Public Services and Procurement Canada, the government’s central purchaser, awarded a total of 1,644 new contracts worth about $23 billion. Of those contracts, 1,372, representing about $17.7 billion, were awarded to suppliers operating in Canada. That is the kind of progress we want to build on. With regard to today’s motion, the Canada Revenue Agency, following a fair and open procurement process, decided to award this contract to a company that operates extensively in Canada and employs Canadian security guards, supervisors and managers. This brings me to an important point about what we mean when we talk about Canadian suppliers. Being a Canadian supplier is not simply a question of who owns the shares of a company. We also need to look at where the economic activity takes place. Under the buy Canadian policy, the definition of a Canadian supplier is based on substantive economic activity in Canada. That includes having a place of business here, being registered and filing taxes here, and conducting ongoing activities and employing people in Canada to deliver goods and services. That distinction matters. A company can be part of a global enterprise and still employ thousands of Canadians. It can pay taxes here. It can operate facilities here. It can conduct research and development here. It can purchase from Canadian suppliers and invest in Canadian communities. Those jobs are Canadian jobs. Those investments are investments in Canada. That economic activity matters to Canada. That is why our approach looks not only at the name or nationality of a parent company, but also at the economic value being created right here in Canada. In fact, Canadian content under the policy can include salaries and services delivered in Canada; research, design and testing carried out here; Canadian software development and systems integration; and Canadian installation, maintenance and training. That approach also sends a powerful message to international companies. If they want to do business with the Government of Canada, they need to invest in Canada, build in Canada and create value in Canada. That is an important part of what buy Canadian is intended to achieve. Buy Canadian is not simply about where a company’s headquarters are located. It is about where the jobs are, where the investment is, where the innovation happens, where the supply chain is built and ultimately where the economic benefits land. We continue to work closely with businesses, suppliers and stakeholders to develop and refine procurement measures that support Canadian industry, strengthen supply chains and drive our country’s economic growth. Our government will always stand with Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. We will build the strongest economy in the G7. We will always support our veterans with job opportunities. I want to assure this House that we are fully committed to our buy Canadian policy, the substantial opportunities it is providing for Canadians and the powerful benefits it is providing to our country. We have shifted from an approach of “best effort” to a clear obligation to support Canadian industries, and we are transforming our economy while we do it. Through buy Canadian, we are supporting our industries today while keeping a clear focus on a sustainable future. That is our promise to Canadians, one that we are delivering on.

Dane Lloyd, Parkland

Conservative
“The government's policy says ceremonies must be religiously neutral. This means Indigenous people cannot share their spiritual beliefs or even mention the Creator. The government is holding back Indigenous spirituality instead of working toward reconciliation.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, on the issue of chaplaincy and the ability to pray at ceremonies, I note that under the government’s policy, it has a specific section regarding indigenous cultural practices. This policy says that an indigenous person is not allowed to share their spiritual practices. In fact, that has to be religiously neutral. There could be a situation where an indigenous person mentions the word “Creator”, and under the Liberal government’s policy, they would not be permitted to share their indigenous spirituality. How is it reconciliation when the government is actively suppressing indigenous spirituality?

Jenna Sudds, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement and to the Secretary of State (Defence Procurement)

Liberal
“I honor our veterans for their service and sacrifice. On Remembrance Day, my community ceremony will include prayer that welcomes everyone, and I expect the same across the country.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity, as I answer the member’s question, to acknowledge the service of veterans and the sacrifice they have made on our behalf and for our country. Their contributions are lasting and recognized. I look forward, on November 11, to attending the local ceremony in my community, where we include prayer that is inclusive. I expect it will be the same as colleagues across this chamber visit and participate in ceremonies in their communities as well.

Sébastien Lemire, Abitibi—Témiscamingue

Bloc Québécois
“The government gave a $12-million contract to an American company instead of a Canadian group that hires veterans. They talk tough about the United States, but they still give them contracts and let Alberta oil go there without tariffs. Meanwhile, a plant in Quebec lost business because of this. I want to know when this unfair treatment will stop.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, on October 20, we found out that the Canada Revenue Agency awarded a $12-million contract to the U.S. company Allied Universal, choosing it over the Canadian Corps of Commissionaires, a non-profit organization that employs many veterans. In fact, veterans make up 15% of its workforce, according to Radio-Canada. I am a bit sick of this Liberal hypocrisy. They say we need to fight back against the United States, yet contracts continue to be awarded to American companies. The clearest example concerns oil exports. After all, 90% of Alberta’s oil and gas exports go to the United States and are not even subject to tariffs. Meanwhile, Quebec is left bearing the cost of this trade war The RYAM plant back home in Témiscamingue is a case in point. Because cardboard is not subject to tariffs when exported to the United States, the company lost a contract in western Canada. Those tariffs should have applied. This is a clear double standard, and it is extremely frustrating. When will this end?

Jenna Sudds, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement and to the Secretary of State (Defence Procurement)

Liberal

Linked statement

“The tax agency followed a fair process when it gave out this contract. A Canadian supplier is not just about who owns the company. It is about whether the company is registered here, creates Canadian jobs, pays taxes, and helps our economy.”
  • A repeated line

    “Being a Canadian supplier is not simply a question of who owns the shares of a company.”

    Said 3 times by 2 members since November 2.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, the Canada Revenue Agency followed a fair and open procurement process when awarding this contract, but it is an important point, as we drill down on the buy Canadian policy, to talk about what we mean when we say “Canadian supplier”. A supplier is not simply a question of who owns the shares of a company. We need to look at where the economic activity is taking place. That means having a business registered in Canada, creating jobs in this country, paying taxes and generating economic output. That is what we expect from Canadian suppliers, and that is what we will continue to uphold.

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

Liberal
“I want the member to share her thoughts on why it is important to remember the sacrifices of our soldiers on Remembrance Day.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member’s comments regarding the different ceremonies that take place across Canada. Sergeant Tommy Prince was a war hero. He was of indigenous background and was looked upon in a very wonderful way. Many of our veterans are buried in the Brookside Cemetery. We could go to the Legion or the Tommy Prince park. I would ask the member to provide her thoughts on how important it is, come November 11 at 11 a.m., that everyone take a moment to reflect on the sacrifices made by our men and women in the forces.

Jenna Sudds, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement and to the Secretary of State (Defence Procurement)

Liberal
“We should all take time on November 11 to thank veterans and their families for their service and sacrifice. I will be at the Remembrance Day ceremony in Kanata to thank them.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is incredibly important that each and every one of us takes the time on November 11 at 11 a.m., as the member stated, to ensure that we pause to celebrate and thank veterans, who have served our country with such distinct honour, and their families, who have made such big sacrifices in them doing so. I will be at the ceremony the Legion puts on in Kanata on that day, and I look forward to thanking the veterans who will be there for their service.

Marianne Dandurand, Compton—Stanstead

Liberal
“Our government is using its purchasing power to support Canadian businesses and hire veterans. Our buy Canadian policy prioritizes local suppliers, and we have awarded nearly $18 billion in contracts to Canadian businesses since last December. The recent CRA security contract was awarded fairly through a competitive contest, and the winning company still employs Canadian workers and veterans.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the motion we are debating today raises two very important questions. First, how does the government use its purchasing power to support Canadian businesses? Second, how do we recognize the contribution of veterans, including by providing them with employment opportunities after their military service? I agree that both of these questions deserve careful consideration. I will begin with something I think we can all agree on: When the Government of Canada spends taxpayers’ money, those investments should, to the greatest extent possible, help support Canadian businesses, workers and supply chains. The Government of Canada is a major purchaser. Its procurement decisions can make a real difference for Canadian companies that may wish to increase production, invest in new equipment, hire employees, expand their operations and contribute to our economic vitality. That is precisely the objective of our buy Canadian policy. In an unstable global economy, our businesses need certainty, and they need contracts such as those awarded by the Government of Canada. Our goal is for Canada to become its own best customer. The buy Canadian policy came into effect just before the holiday season last year, on December 16, and it marks a significant shift in the way we use public procurement to support our economy. In practical terms, what the buy Canadian policy does is prioritize Canadian suppliers and Canadian content in eligible federal government contracts. It includes requirements to promote the use of Canadian materials, including metal, steel, aluminum and wood, sectors that are currently on the front lines of a trade war with our neighbours. These materials will be used in major construction and defence projects, among others. These are priority areas for the Government of Canada and will see significant investments over the coming years and even decades. We also want to make these contracts much more accessible to small businesses. In June, we lowered the threshold for the buy Canadian policy from $25 million to $5 million, which opens the door to much smaller businesses, such as those found throughout regions like mine. Our policy does not just apply to very large companies. It also applies to small businesses that can bid on contracts worth $5 million. To help these businesses gain access to Canadian contracts, we launched the small business procurement program, which streamlines the process, tailors requirements and helps small and medium-sized enterprises navigate a federal system that, I admit, is not always the simplest. These changes are tangible. Between December of last year and October 1 of this year, Public Services and Procurement Canada awarded nearly $18 billion in contracts to Canadian suppliers. These contracts support jobs here at home, support investment, and support business production across Canada. A policy is not worth much if businesses do not know it exists or do not know how to take advantage of it. I would now like to talk about what we are doing in my riding of Compton—Stanstead to ensure that local businesses can access these contracts. As soon as we started discussing the buy Canadian policy, I invited the Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement to my region. He delivered a presentation to business people. Roughly 75 stakeholders attended the presentation, during which his staff also explained the Canadian procurement process and how businesses, like the ones in my riding, can access it. Many organizations, economic development stakeholders and businesses have come to understand the policy changes, the opportunities these may present to their businesses, as well as how they, in turn, can become suppliers to the Government of Canada. In my view, this is essential. It is not enough simply to announce policies in Ottawa. They need to be promoted on the ground. That is how businesses can take advantage of them. My team and I support businesses that wish to better understand federal procurement opportunities, identify relevant opportunities and learn how to participate in the bidding process. We serve as a bridge between the government’s needs and the expertise that exists in my riding, which the government is not always aware of. We have manufacturing companies, we have many agri-food producers, technology firms, construction contractors and environmental specialists. They may not all provide the same products and services, but they all have something to contribute. When we talk about buying Canadian, we are talking about recognizing the expertise of local businesses. I am thinking in particular of the La Station de Compton cheese factory, which recently won four awards at the 2026 Sélection Caseus competition, including two of the highest honours: Caseus gold for its Alfred le Fermier Grand Cru, which was named the best cheese in Quebec, and the Caseus bronze for its Raclette de Compton au poivre. I must say I have a soft spot for the second one. It holds a special place in my heart. I will go out of my way to eat grilled cheese sandwiches at Compton’s cheese factory. That being said, when the Prime Minister came to town, I presented him with some Alfred le Fermier Grand Cru cheese. I will have to ask him what he thought about it. As I said, two of the best cheeses in Quebec are made in my riding. That, too, is what buying Canadian is about. It is about showcasing outstanding products and the expertise of the local artisans who put us on the map. The motion also raises the matter of the service contract awarded by the Canada Revenue Agency and where veterans fit in when it comes to employment opportunities. Let me be very clear: We recognize veterans’ contributions and the importance of offering them meaningful career prospects after their service ends. The Canadian Corps of Commissionaires plays a very important role in helping us do that. It deserves recognition for its history and its contribution to employing veterans. We also need to consider how the contract was awarded. The CRA ran a competitive bidding process. Businesses were evaluated based on predetermined criteria. Technical merit counted for 60% of the score, price counted for 40%, and the contract was ultimately awarded to the bidder with the highest overall score. The successful supplier has significant operations in Canada and employs thousands of people across the country. According to information provided by the CRA, of the 60 employees covered by this contract, 33 are former security guards who have been rehired and 12 are veterans. This in no way diminishes the importance of supporting the Commissionaires and the veterans they employ, but it does serve as a reminder that we must also take into account the Canadian workers who continue to provide services. Since this motion relates to veterans, and with Remembrance Day approaching, I would like to take this opportunity to highlight the contribution that service men and women from my region have made to the defence of our country. The Eastern Townships have a rich military history. In East Clifton stands what is considered to be the oldest cenotaph in Quebec, and possibly in all of Canada. It was erected in 1920 in honour of the soldiers of the First World War. During the Second World War, the municipality of Bury had one of the highest enlistment rates per capita in Canada. Even today, our four reserve units in Sherbrooke, namely the Sherbrooke Hussars, the Fusiliers de Sherbrooke, the 35 Signal Regiment and the 52 Field Ambulance, are recognized for their significant contributions to Canadian Armed Forces missions. I would therefore like to encourage people in our region to take part in the upcoming Remembrance Day ceremonies. There will be nearly 20 of them in my riding of Compton—Stanstead alone, in addition to many others throughout the Eastern Townships. It is important to pay tribute to those who fought in defence of our country. Ultimately, the issues raised by this motion remind us of the same responsibility: to recognize the contributions of the people who build our country and defend it.

Dane Lloyd, Parkland

Conservative
“Switching this security contract from the Commissionaires to a for-profit company hurts charities. The Commissionaires is a non-profit that uses its extra money to help veterans and their families. I want the member to answer for how this choice harms those causes.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this issue about the contract with the Commissionaires and Allied Universal is not just about veterans’ jobs. The Corps of Commissionaires is a non-profit corporation, and the excess revenues that it produces beyond wages are primarily sent toward benevolent funds and charitable causes. These include its national bursary program as well as sponsorship for veterans’ organizations like the No Stone Left Alone Memorial Foundation, military family resource centres and the Royal Canadian Legion. When this government saves a buck by going with a for-profit company, it is actually undermining many charitable causes in this country. I am hoping the member can address that concern.

Marianne Dandurand, Compton—Stanstead

Liberal
“The Commissionaires and the Royal Canadian Legion do important work for veterans and our communities. Many legion branches are turning 100 this year. I encourage everyone to attend Remembrance Day ceremonies in the coming weeks.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we continue to recognize the contribution that an organization like the Commissionaires makes to veterans’ employment opportunities. We also recognize everything they do for the Royal Canadian Legion. On that note, I would point out that many legion branches are celebrating their 100th anniversary this year, making this a truly special occasion. I would like to highlight the various ceremonies that will be held across Canada, including the one at the Sherbrooke War Memorial, the angel on King Street hill that everyone knows. The legion is marking its centennial this year and continues to organize countless activities to honour the contribution of our military personnel. Legion branches play an exceptionally important role in our communities. That is yet another reason to take part in Remembrance Day ceremonies over the coming days and weeks.

Mario Beaulieu, La Pointe-de-l'Île

Bloc Québécois
“The government gave a security contract to Allied Universal instead of the Commissionaires. The Commissionaires is a Canadian non-profit that employs thousands of veterans to guard federal buildings. The government blames the tax agency for this choice instead of taking responsibility. I want the member to explain how this fits with buying Canadian.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I find it somewhat disheartening to see the Liberals justify hiring Allied Universal instead of the Commissionaires, formerly known as the Canadian Corps of Commissionaires. Why is that? The government is shirking its responsibilities by saying that the decision was made by the CRA rather than by the Liberals themselves. Given the proliferation of agencies we are seeing these days, that is worrisome. The Commissionaires, a non-profit organization that already provides security for federal buildings, has 22,000 employees, including 3,500 military and RCMP veterans. What does buy Canadian mean to my colleague, exactly?

Marianne Dandurand, Compton—Stanstead

Liberal
“Our government supports giving contracts to companies like IBM. They provide good, high-tech jobs that help communities near my riding.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is giving me the opportunity to talk about a number of contracts that are having an impact in my riding. I would like to talk about IBM, an American company that has been operating in Canada for nearly 110 years, including next door to my riding, in the riding of my colleague from Brome—Missisquoi. It is one of the companies that receives many of the contracts awarded in the United States, but that have a major impact in Canada. Many people in Bromont work for that company. These are excellent jobs, and this is the type of business that the government wants to support because high-quality, high-tech jobs in our communities are extremely valuable.

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

Liberal
“The member should not give the false impression that our government does not support veterans. We spent about $150 million on computer systems to speed up disability benefits for them. I want the member to talk about how the government keeps supporting veterans.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, much like myself, the member is a very strong advocate in recognizing the importance that the Corp of Commissionaires has played over the years. It is a very important role. However, it is not appropriate to attempt to mislead or give a false impression that the government does not support veterans. We do many different projects. One that I am very grateful for is that we are expediting disability benefits. Shortly after the last federal election, our new Prime Minister put into place about $150 million to speed that up through IT development. I wonder if the member can provide her thoughts on why the government, all of us, continues to recognize the importance of our veterans—

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 160

  1. Private Members' Business Income Tax Act 7 statements
  2. Government Orders Business of Supply 51 statements
  3. Oral Questions Taxation 12 statements
  4. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 6 statements
  5. Oral Questions Taxation 12 statements
  6. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  7. Oral Questions Justice 10 statements
  8. Oral Questions Employment Insurance 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Health 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions International Trade 14 statements
  11. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 7 statements
  13. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Labour 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Veterans Affairs 2 statements
  16. Government Orders Business of Supply 93 statements
  17. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  18. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  19. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  20. Oral Questions The Environment 4 statements