“I oppose this bill. It creates a new defence agency and gives a minister the power to hand out contracts without open competition. The government has already failed to buy proper planes, helicopters, and submarines for our military. This bill adds more bureaucracy, cuts oversight, and lets the government take control of private companies. Conservatives will vote against it.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour and a pleasure to stand in the House and speak on behalf of the people of Miramichi—Grand Lake. The Prime Minister fancies himself as an economist. He has the degrees. He has spent years telling Canadians that he understands how money works. Since being elected, many Canadians actually think he is a travel blogger, apparently. He loves the way bubbles from champagne tickle his nose, and he has a very refined palate for caviar and fine foods, but as he is a man who apparently understands money, I have a simple question for him: Has he ever read Milton Friedman? Friedman had a straightforward way of explaining why governments so often waste money. He said there are four ways to spend it. First, if we spend our own money on ourselves, we care equally about the price and the quality. Second, if we spend our own money on someone else, we care about the price but not so much about the quality. Third, if we spend someone else’s money on ourselves, we care about the quality but not so much about the price. Fourth, if we spend someone else’s money on someone else, we do not care much about the price and do not care much about the quality. That last one is the government. When it comes to defence procurement in this country, that is exactly what we have been watching with the Liberal government. Canada is known for a lot of things, like hockey, maple syrup and politeness that sometimes goes too far. We are not known for the success of our bureaucratic defence procurement. If we asked any contractor who has ever tried to get a job done on time and on budget, we would learn pretty quickly that the more layers of people we have spending other people’s money, the more things go wrong. In this country, Liberals have spent 11 years proving that point. Fighter jets are still not settled, helicopters have become a national punchline and submarines do not exist. Even the Snowbirds were flying aircraft older than most of the people watching them, and they are now grounded until sometime in 2030. This is not news; this is the Liberal record. Now the Liberals want to fix it by creating another agency and another minister, with broader powers to sole-source contracts and skip competitions. They want to take the most inefficient way to spend money and give it a new name and a bigger chequebook. Division 16 of the bill would hand that unnamed minister the authority to sole-source almost anything that can be tied to national defence or national security. The list of exceptions is long. It includes urgent operational requirements; supporting a sector of the economy; sensitive technology; research and innovation; agreements with other governments, probably the countries where our Prime Minister also holds citizenship; and a catch-all that lets regulations add still more reasons. Once these powers are in place, the competition can be skipped and the supplier can be excluded on security grounds without a full explanation or a real appeal. The bill would also remove the ordinary consequences if a competition that should have been run is not run. At the same time, it would allow the government to buy shares in corporations and replace directors and officers. This is not a minor technical change. This is power to take control of a company when it suits the government of the day. It sounds like socialism to me. There would be no serious requirement to report back to the House on how the powers are used, no clear obligation to tell Parliament when a national security exception is invoked and no meaningful check on loans, advance payments, guarantees or grants. I am sure the Prime Minister’s friends over at Brookfield Asset Management are grinning like the butcher’s dog. I can just imagine the world of opportunities that the bill would open for those who are fortunate enough to be in business with the Prime Minister. There is an old line attributed to Churchill: “Gentlemen, we have run out of money. Now we have to think.” Under the Liberal government, we ran out of taxpayers’ money a long time ago, but the difference is that the government is still not thinking. It is just adding more people to spend other people’s money on other people and calling it a success. The Defence Investment Agency has already been operating for over a year. It has held signing ceremonies. It has announced preferred partners. It has not delivered a single piece of equipment to the Canadian Armed Forces. When its own CEO reportedly considered stepping down because the bureaucracy was still too slow, that should have been the end of the argument. We do not fix bureaucracy by giving it a new letterhead and a larger budget. In my experience as a construction worker and a contractor, in my line of work, if a job keeps going over budget and past deadline, we do not solve it by hiring more project managers who have never swung a hammer. We put on our work boots, roll up our sleeves, figure out what is broken and fix it. We lead by example. The Canadian Armed Forces do not need another layer of bureaucracy deciding what they get, when they get it and what the company affiliated with Brookfield gets in the contract. Our men and women in the military need equipment on time and at a price that makes sense, with someone who can be held accountable when it does not happen. This bill would not do that. It would build a department around a problem and make it official. There was a famous line spoken by an American sailor at Pearl Harbor, spoken by our allies, I might add. Aboard the USS New Orleans, a man said, “Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.” The line was celebrated throughout World War II and soldiers sang songs about it, because it rang true. In 2026, under the Liberal government, our soldiers now have neither of the two things that success in battle requires. I asked a question in the House yesterday about the forced closure of St. Luke’s Chapel at CFB Gagetown. Canadians and veterans’ groups have been told that there is no room for the Lord or for prayer in our military. Now the Liberals are keeping the ammunition from them as well. If the Liberal government keeps going, we are going to have to train our military on fighting with rocks and sticks. I can only speak for myself, but let me tell the House that I am ashamed of sitting in the House while we treat the brave men and women who serve this nation and put themselves in harm’s way with such disrespect. Conservatives have been clear about what we support: one point of accountability for defence procurement and a special secretariat in the Privy Council Office so that military contracts are treated as the priority they are, not another agency, not another minister with a new title and not a CEO paid more than the Prime Minister with no background in national defence who is secretly shuffling contracts to Liberal insiders. Conservatives will fight to get the sailors, soldiers and aviators of the Canadian Armed Forces the equipment they need, with efficiency and accountability and consistent with the interests of Canadian security, not Liberal insider advantage. This bill fails the test. It would expand control. It would reduce transparency. It would treat the Canadian Armed Forces as a problem to be managed by another bureaucracy rather than a force to be properly equipped and deserving of the respect and thanks of a grateful nation. The first duty of any government is defence of the realm. That duty is not fulfilled by creating more agencies; it is fulfilled by equipping the people who stand on the wall. That duty would not be fulfilled by this bill, so Conservatives will not support it. We will stand with the men and women who have to use this equipment, not the system that keeps failing to deliver it to them.”

“I oppose this bill. It gives a minister too much power to hand out defence contracts without competition and without reporting back to Parliament. It also lets the government buy company shares and take over private businesses. Our military needs proper equipment and accountability, not unchecked power for one minister.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member opposite asked about accountability. Let us talk about accountability and what this bill would do. It would hand an unnamed minister the power to sole-source almost anything tied to defence and national security, 13 different reasons to skip a competition and the ability to exclude a bidder on security grounds without a full explanation, with no serious requirements to come back to the House and report how those powers are used. At the same time, it would allow the government to buy shares in corporations and replace directors and officers. That is not a minor technical change. That is the power to take control of a company when it suits the government of the day. It sounds like socialism to me. In my line of work, if someone wants to spend other people’s money with almost no questions asked, we do not call that efficiency; we call that a problem. The Canadian Armed Forces do not need more unaccountable power in the hands of one minister. They need equipment that arrives on time, with someone to hold—”

“I oppose this new defence agency. The government has a terrible record of buying military gear. They take decades to buy fighter jets, and the Snowbirds are grounded until the 2030s. This agency has run for over a year, but it has not delivered any new equipment to our military.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member wants to know why we oppose this agency. He should look at the Liberal record. Fighter jets took decades and are still not settled. The Snowbirds are grounded until the 2030s. Canada is known for a lot of things. We are not known for success in Liberal defence procurement. The Defence Investment Agency has been operating for over a year, with signing ceremonies and preferred partner announcements, but not a single new piece of equipment has been delivered to the Canadian Armed Forces.”

“I oppose this bill because it wastes public money. It lets the government hand out contracts without open bidding, adds more middlemen, and barely reports back to Parliament.”

“Mr. Speaker, this bill would not improve value for money. Let us go back to the basics. The Liberals do not care much about price. They do not care much about quality. That is the Liberal mentality. That is exactly what this bill would expand, with more powers to sole-source, more ability to skip competitions, more people in the middle spending other people’s money on other people, and almost no reporting back to Parliament. They are just adding more people to spend more of other people’s money and calling it reform. That is not a plan. That is a problem.”

“The budget has some good things in it, but the government still needs to be careful with its spending. The member has tried to get the government to promise it will stick to its spending limits, but they have not answered. I am asking the member if he thinks the government should stick to those limits in tomorrow's budget.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member for Wellington—Halton Hills North has tried for the last several days to get an indication from the government as to its commitment to its stated goals of relying on fiscal anchors. A number of good things the member spoke to are covered in budget 2025, but it has to be done in the overall context of fiscal responsibility. Due to the lack of responses the House received during question period, I wonder if the member would opine on his view of whether the government should be held to fiscal anchors that it states, and whether they should be carried forward, let us say, even into the budget tomorrow.”

“This bill lets a minister ban companies from military contracts for no reason and with no way to appeal. It also lets the minister give out contracts with no competition or accountability. I want to know why the government is ending fairness and transparency in this process.”

“Mr. Speaker, I have a question about the minister who would be responsible for the Defence Investment Agency. The minister would be able, for no reason, to disqualify a company for procurement purposes without explanation or justification and with no avenue for appeal. The minister would also have the ability to sole-source contracts without any accountability. Does the member have a good understanding of why the Liberals have abandoned basic fairness in tendering? Why have they chosen to not be transparent in the process?”

“The government is spending and borrowing too much money. We now pay more on debt interest than we send to provinces for health care. That debt interest costs every Canadian about $1,500 today and will soon hit $2,000. I want the government to stop wasteful spending, keep its promises to limit debt, and scrap the carbon tax and fuel taxes.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is really fitting that we should be here today discussing budgetary matters the day before the Liberal government tables its 2026 budget. This is a budget implementation act, so it is an opportunity to talk about the state of federal finances, to have a look at where we are, how we got here and what the road ahead looks like. We should all buckle up because it looks like it is going to be a bumpy ride. Let us start with where we are now. Well, for starters, we are in the red. There is a lot of debt. Even the Prime Minister’s own economists confirm it. The Parliamentary Budget Officer, a non-partisan finance and accounting expert appointed by the government itself, just came out with a scathing report card saying exactly that. She said that our deficit now is more than double the size of the one left behind by Justin Trudeau just 18 months ago. Canadians already watched Justin Trudeau spend unprecedented amounts of money. Can members imagine just how much someone would have to spend to double that? Somehow, the Prime Minister and his finance minister found a way. The Parliamentary Budget Officer warned that borrowing is backloaded and will get even worse before the end of this decade. What happens when someone spends more money than they earn? Anyone who has ever taken out a mortgage or carried a balance on a credit card knows the answer. Eventually, they have to pay for that borrowing. That is exactly what is happening here in Ottawa. The bankers and bondholders are not donating this money out of kindness. Every dollar of deficit the government borrows must be repaid, complete with interest. The Liberal government may run up the tab, but the bill always arrives in the mailbox of Canadian taxpayers, and that bill is becoming increasingly expensive. The federal government could take every single dollar it collects in GST from everything bought and sold across Canada for an entire year and it still would not be enough to cover 12 months of interest payments on our national debt. The Parliamentary Budget Officer’s calculations show that interest on the debt now costs Canadians more than the Canada health transfer. Ottawa is spending approximately $59 billion a year on debt charges, compared with about $57 billion for health transfers to provinces. Let us think about what that means. We have reached a point where the interest of past borrowing exceeds the federal government’s largest transfer for health care. That should concern every Canadian, regardless of political stripe. Every single year, tens of billions of taxpayer dollars leave the federal treasury before a single hospital bed is added, before a single doctor is hired and before a single Canadian receives faster access to care. We can imagine what $59 billion could do if it remained available for Canadian priorities. It could help reduce wait times in our health care system. It could provide meaningful tax relief to families struggling with the cost of living. It could strengthen the Canadian Armed Forces and support our brave men and women in uniform. Instead, that money is being consumed by debt charges while Canadians see no improvement in services, no shorter wait times and no direct benefit in their daily lives. We all know the Prime Minister used to be the governor of the Bank of Canada. Given that background, Canadians could reasonably expect fiscal discipline from the government. In fact, David Dodge, another former governor of the Bank of Canada, offered a simple rule of thumb. The federal government should keep debt servicing costs below 10% of its total revenues. Beyond that point, borrowing becomes increasingly expensive as lenders demand compensation for the greater risk. When too much of the government’s income is being consumed by interest payments, it becomes a warning sign that the country’s finances are heading in the wrong direction. The Liberal government crossed that threshold, and the problem has only gotten worse since. With more people and an aging population, there is a greater demand for services, so people might expect the fastest-growing federal expense to be health care, old age security or the Canada child benefit, but it is not. In fact, it is not even a service provided to Canadians. The fastest-growing line item is the interest on our debt. Just a few years ago, every Canadian owed about $600 in interest on the government debt. Right now, that stands at nearly $1,500. In five years, it will be nearly $2,000, or more than three times what Canadians were paying only a few years ago. I want to speak directly to the people at home in Cambridge and North Dumfries who are watching today. They can think about what $2,000 could do for them right now. That is a month or two of groceries to help feed their family. It could cover a month’s rent or help make a mortgage payment to keep a roof over their head. It could help pay down student loans, cover rising utility bills, replace a broken appliance or put a little money aside toward a down payment on a first home. For most Canadians, $2,000 is not a small amount of money. It is the difference between getting ahead and falling further behind. That is the real cost of the Liberal government’s reckless spending. Money that could be helping Canadian families build a better future for themselves is instead being used to pay interest on the government’s debt. That brings us to the next bump in the road. How did we get here? Deficits and debt do not appear overnight. They are the result of choices. The Liberal government repeatedly assured Canadians that there was a plan to keep the country’s finances on track. It told Canadians that it could be trusted with a national credit card. The Prime Minister pointed to a series of so-called fiscal anchors that were meant to guide spending decisions and limit borrowing. The problem is that what he says and what he does are two very different things. This week, the Parliamentary Budget Officer was clear. She said those anchors provide very little fiscal discipline when it comes to spending. Specifically, the Liberal government set out two fiscal anchors: a declining debt-to-GDP ratio and a declining deficit-to-GDP ratio. However, instead of going down, both of those ratios are going up. The government’s problem is not that it missed its targets. The government’s problem is that its targets are moving in the wrong direction. By its own metrics and standards, the government is failing. It is perfectly clear that the government cannot be trusted to self-regulate when it can simply sit back and spend someone else’s money, and that is why Conservatives are here: to hold the government accountable when it goes too far, to ask the tough questions Canadians deserve to have answered and to be the voice of reason and responsibility in this place. The question is not whether there is a problem. The numbers make that perfectly clear. The real question is whether the government is prepared to change course before the situation gets worse. More importantly, where do we go from here? The government is set to table another budget tomorrow, and Conservatives have some suggestions. To start, the government needs to rein in reckless spending and start living within its means. Fiscal responsibility does not mean abandoning priorities. We are not talking about cutting important social programs. We want to always be able to afford these programs, but in order to do so, we need to cut back on wasteful spending. Conservatives have identified $150 billion in wasteful spending on foreign aid, consultants, bureaucracy and pointless projects that could be cancelled tomorrow to save Canadians money. If the Prime Minister does not want to do that, then we at least want him to keep his word and stick to the so-called fiscal anchors that he himself laid out. They are insufficient, but they are a start. More importantly, they are something the Prime Minister promised Canadians. Promises are easy to make. Fiscal discipline means keeping them when it counts. Finally, we want the Prime Minister to save Canadians money on gas, groceries and everything else. He can do so by eliminating punitive taxes like the GST on fuel, the industrial carbon tax and the fuel standard. At the end of the day, this really is not all that complicated. Every person understands that one cannot spend money one does not have. They know that when the credit card bill comes due, somebody has to pay it. Every dollar the Liberal government spends ultimately comes out of a hard-working Canadian’s pocket. That is why we expect the government to exercise a little common sense, to prioritize the things that matter, to make responsible decisions and to recognize there is a limit to what taxpayers can afford. However, that is not what we are seeing from the government. Instead, we are seeing a government that wants to spend more, borrow more and tax more, while asking Canadians to simply have faith that everything will work out in the end. Canadians have heard that story before, and they are paying the price for it today. Tomorrow, the Prime Minister will have another opportunity to demonstrate that he understands the seriousness of the situation. He can present a budget that gets spending under control, restores fiscal discipline and gives Canadians some much-needed relief, or he can double down on the same approach that got us here in the first place. Conservatives will be watching very closely, because our job is not to give the government a blank cheque. It is to make sure that every dollar of taxpayer money is spent responsibly, that families get a break wherever possible and that the next generation is not left holding the bill for today’s decisions. If the Prime Minister cannot do that tomorrow, then Canadians should know exactly why.”

• Echo ×11

  A repeated line

  “Including the industrial carbon tax and the clean fuel standard.”

  Said 11 times by 10 members since April 28.

  Every time it was said →

“Our military needs support, but that only shows the government has failed to act for years. Businesses are closing, investors are leaving, manufacturers cannot get supplies, and people are losing jobs. This government is making our economy weaker.”

“Mr. Speaker, I agree that our defence program should be supported. Our men and women in uniform are definitely in need, but that shows the failures of what the government has been doing. These are things that should have been done years ago. Currently, I am looking at businesses shutting down and investors leaving Canada. Manufacturers are telling me they can no longer wait for the supplies they need to fulfill their contracts. Jobs are being lost, and that is not building a stronger Canada. It is making a weaker economy and making life more unaffordable for Canadians.”

“The government is spending too much money. It is spending double what Justin Trudeau spent, and debt charges are growing faster than any other cost. This leaves our children with huge debt and shows the government has failed.”

“Mr. Speaker, I agree. The Parliamentary Budget Officer gave a scathing report. Spending is unprecedented. The government is spending more money than Justin Trudeau ever did, double the amount, and debt charges are now the fastest-growing piece of federal spending. This is leaving our children and future generations with generational debt, and that is not a sign of success. It is a complete signal of failure by the government.”

“The Liberal government is spending too much money. This overspending makes life more expensive for all Canadians.”

“Mr. Speaker, why is it that Liberal government overspending makes life unaffordable for Canadians? It makes life more expensive for everybody.”

“Life is too expensive, and government spending is not helping. Food bank visits are way up, and seniors cannot afford rent, food, and bills.”

“Mr. Speaker, right now over four million visits to the food bank in Toronto are happening. There is a senior in my community who is 71 years old. The amount of money she makes does not cover her rent, food and bills. She is on a wait-list for affordable housing, but the wait-list is 10 years long, and she is looking for a part-time job. At 71 years old, she is trying to get back to work. She cannot find a job and cannot pay her expenses. She reached out to ask me what I can do for her, what we can do for her or what government can do for her. This amount of spending is not making life affordable. Seeing our seniors struggle after a lifetime of hard work is shameful.”

“The government's debt numbers are misleading because they count public pension money against what Ottawa owes. That pension money belongs to workers and retirees, not the government. This budget should focus on making life more affordable for Canadians.”

“Mr. Speaker, being the tallest in a short room is not much of a plan. The measure that the Liberals like to quote is net debt, which counts the assets in our pension plan against what Ottawa owes. Those pension plans belong to Canadian workers and retirees and not to the government. This budget needs to focus on the concerns we are hearing from Canadians, and those are about making life affordable.”

“A serious bus crash just happened in my region, and hospitals are treating the injured. My thoughts are with everyone affected. The government's spending is out of control and making life harder for Canadians. In the last year, food bank visits doubled and the national debt doubled. We now spend more money paying interest on the debt than we send to provinces for health care. Groceries cost 33% more than in 2020. The government has failed to protect forestry jobs in my riding, and struggling veterans have been offered assisted dying instead of real help. The government needs to control its spending and make life affordable.”

“Mr. Speaker, if you will indulge me, I will note that just a short while ago, the member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies and I were notified that there was a mass casualty event impacting our ridings. As a matter of fact, a code orange has been declared by the hospital in Prince George as well as in Mackenzie due to a large bus accident. We are sending our thoughts and prayers to all those who are injured. Our thoughts and prayers are with all those involved, including the first responders who have attended this incident and the doctors, nurses and health care workers who are treating the injured. The extent of the injuries and casualties is not known at this point. It is not public knowledge, but I want to let everyone back home know that we are praying for them. I know that my colleague from Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies echoes my sentiments. Canadians were promised a government focused on economic growth, investment and affordability. We were told that the Prime Minister was the man with the plan and the adult in the room, and that he had all this experience that was going to lead Canadians and our country to the promised land. Canadians made a choice, and they took it hook, line and sinker. What we have seen over the last year is that food bank visits have more than doubled under the Liberal government. We have seen our debt more than double as well, and more than what the previous prime minister did in 10 years. In one year, the Prime Minister has more than doubled the debt. We now spend more money servicing the debt than we do on health care transfers to our provinces, which is absolutely shameful given the mental health and addictions crisis we have in this country. We have more Canadians and working poor having to use a food bank just to put food on their table, yet day after day, the Prime Minister, the Liberal front bench and others stand up and say that Canadians have never had it so good. When we raise the issue, they say we are talking down projects and Canadians, but I disagree. We are fighting for Canadians. On this side, the Conservatives, the official opposition, are fighting for Canadians. When a Canadian wakes up in the morning, the first thing on their mind is not the war overseas. It is the fact that they cannot put food on their table. They are worried if they are going to be able to make rent, make their mortgage payments or pay their bills. At the end of the month, there is far less of their paycheque left. In my riding of Cariboo—Prince George—Omineca, we have been hit so hard with job losses due to the forestry crisis. The government, like the previous Liberal government, has been unable to secure a softwood lumber agreement or put the hard-working families and communities that depend on forestry dollars first. It should care about them and make them a priority. We have veterans who are struggling to make ends meet. I know there are some in the audience today. They are phoning Veterans Affairs to get help, and when pleading for help, they are being offered MAID. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Todd Doherty: Mr. Speaker, to my colleague heckling me across the way, I will say it is true. If she would like the information and the proof of it, she can come see me or any of my colleagues who have sat on the veterans affairs committee previously or sat on the MAID committee through the summer and heard the testimony. It is absolutely true, and it is shameful. The colleague across the way, who has been here for a minute, is doubting what I am saying. She should check my record of standing up for veterans and standing up for those who fight for our communities and fight for our country yet have been forgotten by the Liberal government. It is shameful. Tomorrow is another day, and tomorrow the government has an opportunity to provide more hope and provide real action that will make life more affordable for Canadians. What are we going to see? I hope it is not more band-aids. I know the people in my riding are not looking for handouts. They are looking for an opportunity to work. They are looking for the government to stand up for them when they are at the negotiating table, but it is absent. The government likes to talk a big game, but it is not there. Debt interest is projected to reach $83 billion a year. Food bank visits, as I mentioned, have doubled. Grocery prices are 33% higher now than they were in 2020. Canadians are working harder and paying more, yet too many are struggling to afford the basics. Conservatives believe the government should respect taxpayers, control spending and put affordability first. How about putting Canadians first? The Prime Minister spends more time in the air collecting air miles than he does in this House. Canadians deserve a government that makes life more affordable, not one that leaves them paying the price for its fiscal mismanagement. I hope tomorrow brings more sunny ways and not more dark days.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “Canadians deserve a government that makes life more affordable.”

  Said 3 times by 3 members since May 28.

  Every time it was said →