Branden Leslie · TranslatePolitics.ca

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-16

“I want the Prime Minister to admit his affordability plan has failed. People are struggling to afford basic necessities and are resorting to GoFundMe pages for help. The Prime Minister is out of touch with those who are suffering.”

“The economy shrank three out of four times. Canada is the only G20 country in a recession. The Prime Minister should cancel policies that cost too much so Canadians can afford their lives.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said affordability is the best it has been in decades, but normal, hard-working, everyday Canadians know that is simply not true. Meat Loaf famously once sang Two Out of Three Ain't Bad, but, surely, three out of four is not good. That is certainly true when it comes to economic decline, but that is exactly what the Prime Minister has given us. He has given us three out of four quarters of negative economic growth, making us the only G20 nation in a recession. What is the Liberals' response? They are downplaying it as nothing more than just a technicality. Will the Prime Minister reverse his costly policies that caused this crisis so that Canadians can afford to live again?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

2026-06-12

“I am going to talk about you, not the bill. You used to say that the other party made communities unsafe. You used to say their policies helped criminals, not victims. You were right. Their policies are still the same. But now you sit with them. You also said that MPs who switch parties should ask their voters again. You switched. So when will you ask your voters who they want?”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague's speech. She talked about unintended consequences a lot, which was a bit strange for somebody who, just months ago, told Canadians that it was the Liberals making her communities less safe and that it was their “bail not jail” policies and legislation that favoured criminals over victims. In fact, that member said that criminals are making out very well under the Liberals. She was right. These policies have not changed. The only thing that has changed is where she sits. She also said that MPs who cross the floor should go back to their constituents for a fresh mandate. If she truly believes the principles she spent years defending, including that Liberal soft-on-crime policies have made her community less safe, when is she going to go back to constituents and find out who they want to elect to represent them?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm trying to make you look like a hypocrite for using time allocation. I want to embarrass you by quoting what your own party said about time allocation before. I don't explain why time allocation itself is actually good or bad for this bill. I just want to hit you with this gotcha quote.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I recognize that the minister was not here during the last Conservative government. There are members across the way who were here, and they may recall the outrage whenever the Harper government used time allocation. If we look at the number of sitting days the Liberal government has had in place since it got its majority, it is on a vastly higher pace in the use of time allocation. I would like to read a quote from the debate on Bill C‑38. It said that the government has consistently demonstrated a lack of respect for democracy and the parliamentary process when discussing the use of time allocation. Who said that? It was the member for Winnipeg North. I am wondering if the minister could explain to us how the glass house he lives in is different now than it was 12 years ago when the member for Winnipeg North was yelling about the same issue.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Statements by Members

The Economy

2026-06-11

“Canada's economy is failing because the Liberals spent too much, regulated too much, and blocked too much development. Now Canadians can't afford food and the Liberals want to blame everyone but themselves. The Prime Minister spent a million dollars on luxury food while Canadians lined up at food banks. The Liberals caused this problem and they need to stop making excuses.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals did not drive our economy into the ditch by accident. They took every wrong turn and ignored every warning sign, and now they want to blame everyone else. After more than a decade of inflationary spending, red tape and anti-development laws, Canada is now the only G20 country in a recession. Families are not reading this in an economics textbook. They are living it at the grocery store, the gas pump and the kitchen table. A new United Way survey found that 60% of Canadians are anxious about their personal finances and 38% are struggling with food insecurity, and one in five say that all the food in their home was gone with no money to buy more. That is not a talking point. That is an empty refrigerator. Last year, a record 2.2 million Canadians lined up at food banks in a single month. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister spent nearly $1 million on luxury catering over 14 trips, enough to feed a family for 55 years. The Liberals can blame the mud, the road or the weather, but everybody knows that they have been behind the wheel. Canadians deserve a government that stops—

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-06-08

“I'm going to speak as if electing my party would just magically make the country prosper. I'm trying to make us sound like an easy answer.”

“I like the idea of a sovereign wealth fund. But not when it's created by borrowing and leaving our oil in the ground. When the government finances projects entirely on debt and calls it progress, that's not real progress. The government needs to admit its policies are failing Canadians.”

“The government needs to admit when it's wrong and stop blaming others. They need to accept reality and change their policies. The Conservatives have ideas to move the country forward. The Liberals should listen to them and change course so we can all be better off.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I want to believe the Liberals have that in them. The last 10 years have not shown me that they have an ability to accept things as they are. It is like they do not talk to people who live in the real world and see the cost pressures they are facing. One thing that really bothers me is that in government, just like in life, it is okay to sometimes say, “We were wrong. We messed up.” We do not have to continuously hide behind the fact that things are not going okay and try to blame everybody else. The government should take a bit of responsibility. The other day, I heard a minister try to blame Stephen Harper. It is 11 years later. It is time to accept that things have not been going well because of the policies and accept the ideas that are coming collaboratively from the Conservatives to try to move this country forward. Change the policies and change course so that we can all be better off.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“Canada is doing great, but only because of regular people, not because of the government. The government caused the problems we have, and now it won't admit it. We have to change what we're doing because it's not working. Some people are really struggling. We need to do better for the people we represent. The government is just spinning its wheels.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, Canadians are thriving, despite the government. The member talks about this being just a technical recession. Are collectors just technically calling, asking for their money that has been loaned out? Is a mom just technically skipping meals so that she can afford to feed her daughter? Are these just technicalities? No. The crisis facing this country has been clear for many years. The government not only caused it, but refuses to accept that it is to blame for it. It is time to change course and recognize when the government is spinning its wheels and failing Canadians. Life has not been good for everyone. It is time to accept that and change direction. We can and must do better for the people we are here to represent.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“Canada's economy is struggling. The government promised to control spending, but the deficit is rising. The government's own report shows that major projects are slow, expensive, and confusing. Canada needs clear standards and decisions to attract investment and create jobs. The government should stop making excuses and making success harder. Canadians deserve better than a government that asks them to settle for less.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, when a truck is stuck in a ditch, there are two ways to make the problem worse. One is to keep flooring the gas while pretending that spinning the tires means we are getting somewhere. The other is to just simply blame the mud, the road and the person who told us to take the turn in the first place, but to never admit that the driver could be the problem. That is where Canada's economy is today. The government has been spinning the tires for years, throwing mud in every direction and telling everyone that if we wait just a little bit longer, the country is finally going to start pulling ahead. However, now we can see what is really happening: We are not moving ahead but are in fact falling behind. The motion before the House says what millions of families already know: Canada has been driven into the G20's only recession. Scotiabank and the Bank of Montreal have both downgraded growth expectations. The Parliamentary Budget Officer's latest report shows slowing growth, a weakening financial outlook and a bigger-than-promised deficit. Those words can sound very far removed from real life, but that is exactly where this bad news lands. It lands on the mortgage renewal, the grocery bill, the repair that cannot wait and the credit card bill that was supposed to be paid down but is, in fact, bigger than expected. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has now put numbers to what Canadians already feel. She projects real GDP growth of only 1.1% in 2026 and 1.6% in 2027. That is not an economy that is charging ahead. She also says that the deficit is expected to rise from $36.3 billion to $72 billion. That is not simply a rounding error. It is the fiscal equivalent of promising to back out of the driveway but ending up going through the garage door. The government did not miss its promise by just a little bit. It missed it by billions and billions of dollars. It told Canadians that spending was under control, but eventually the bills come due. The numbers are a lot harder to spin than the speeches the Liberals offer are. Canadians were promised one thing, but the numbers now show something completely different. As usual, Canadians are of course stuck with the invoice. Then there is the fiscal anchor that used to be a point of discussion. That is the government's own promise to keep the deficit from growing out of control. It is supposed to tell Canadians that someone around the cabinet table still knows when to stop borrowing, stop spending and stop pretending that the budget will balance itself. The PBO says that there is less than a 1% chance the government will meet that promise. That is not a fiscal anchor; that is a lottery ticket, at best. No person could walk into a bank with a 1% chance of making their household budget work and call that responsible. No small business owner could tell their employees that there is only a 1% chance that the paycheques will clear and call that a plan. A weak economy shows up long before anybody gives it a name. It shows up when the job sites get quiet, when the bay sits empty at the shop, when the truck stays parked in the yard and when a young worker who was supposed to start Monday is told he cannot because there is not enough work. That is what slow growth means when it reaches the real world: fewer hours, fewer raises, fewer orders and fewer chances for young people to get started in their career. The government wants us to believe that this was all just unavoidable. It says there have been global pressures. Of course there have been. Every G20 nation has faced interest rate hikes, supply chain challenges, inflation, war, energy shocks and global uncertainty. The difference is that Canada is now being described as the G20's only nation in a recession. When everyone faces the storm but only one boat starts taking on water, maybe it is time to see what the captain has been doing. A country does not get rich based on how much the government spends. A country gets richer when people can build, invest, produce, hire, export, take risks and succeed. It gets richer when a welder can leave the shop on Friday and start his own business on Monday, or when a mine with Canadian mineral workers can be approved before the opportunity moves somewhere else. We have all the ingredients of an incredibly prosperous country. We do not have a shortage of ability. We have a government that keeps turning that ability into delays, higher costs, and smaller paycheques for Canadians. Imagine someone who wants to build something in this country. Imagine a shop in a small town, a mine up north, a grain terminal, a processing plant, a power line or an energy project. They start with an idea, workers ready to go, suppliers lined up and a belief that Canada is still a place where real effort can become something real. These investors then meet the process that the government has built. First comes the permit delays, then some new rule and the consultation that leads to yet another consultation. Then the financing gets more expensive throughout the time that passes. Investors then ask why the same project could move so much faster somewhere else. After a while, the question is no longer whether the project makes sense; the question is how long people are willing to bleed money before they simply give up. That is why the government's own consultation paper on getting major projects built is so revealing. After years of Conservatives, provinces, workers, industry and investors warning that Canada had become too slow and too uncertain, the government is now admitting the same thing but in writing. Its own paper says major projects could “face a complicated and time-consuming” process. It points to duplication and poor coordination between departments. It says, “mines, ports, pipelines, nuclear facilities, and transportation infrastructure [are] often slow, expensive, and confusing.” It even admits that “it has often taken more than five years for a project to receive the federal decisions” needed before construction can even begin. Bill C-69 was passed in 2019. The Liberals sold it is a way to restore confidence, to protect the environment and to help good projects move forward. In reality, it became simply a symbol of delay and uncertainty. The Supreme Court later of course made clear that the problem was not only in the delays that it caused. The act went too far, by allowing the federal government to turn limited federal interests into a much broader review of projects that often mainly fell under provincial jurisdiction. The Liberals amended the act and then claimed that the problem was somehow fixed, yet here they are again admitting that major projects still face a process that is slow, expensive, confusing, poorly coordinated and too often takes longer than five years. The Prime Minister wants to sound like a man who can get Canada building again, but the system he is now allegedly trying to repair was built, defended and celebrated by his own Liberal Party. Canada does not need weaker environmental standards. It needs clear standards, real timelines, and decisions that actually get made. Money goes where it is welcome. Jobs go where projects can move forward. Opportunity goes where people are allowed to build things. If the government keeps making Canada slower, more expensive and more uncertain, it should not be shocked when investments start looking for a different address. What Conservatives are saying is not very complicated: Reverse the costly and inflationary decisions that helped put Canada in this position to begin with; restore discipline and federal spending; stop treating borrowed money as a substitute for private sector growth; make Canada a place where major projects can actually get approved and built again; lower the cost of work, investment, energy, transport and homebuilding; stop punishing the sectors that pay the bills; and focus on paycheques, production, homes, food, energy, exports and opportunity. Canada is not poor, Canada is not weak, and Canada is not doomed. The country has everything it needs to succeed, except a federal government willing to stop making excuses and stop making success harder. We could be a country to which investment comes because approvals are clear, taxes are competitive, energy is reliable, workers are respected and projects move forward. We could be a country where the next generation inherits more than debt and more than just excuses. It starts with admitting that the current approach has failed miserably. The government made the bills bigger, the economy weaker and the deficit worse, and now it wants us to be impressed that it found some gentler words for its own failure. Canadians deserve better than a government that asks them to settle for less. We were not handed a small country, a poor country or a country that is running out of promise. We were handed one of the greatest nations on earth, blessed with resources, talent, courage, and people who still believe tomorrow can be better than today. What we need now is a government with enough faith in Canadians to let them build, work, dream and prosper once again. It is time to stop spinning the wheels and calling that progress. It is time to change course.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Private Members' Business

Silver Alert National Framework Act

2026-06-05

“I want this bill to pass because it will help protect vulnerable seniors with dementia who go missing. It will create a national framework for Silver Alerts, similar to Amber Alerts for children. This is important because when a senior with dementia goes missing, time is critical. They are at high risk of injury or death from exposure, especially in cold weather. A coordinated alert system will help mobilize the community and police to search for the missing senior quickly. The bill respects the role of provinces and police, and includes privacy safeguards. I think of rural areas like my riding where a senior can disappear on a country road and distance becomes dangerous. This bill can save lives and give families peace of mind. It's a common sense, non-partisan issue that we should all support.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the legislation from my Conservative colleague from Manitoba, Bill C-263, the silver alert national framework act. I want everyone to imagine a cold winter evening in rural Manitoba. The sun has gone down in early evening yet again, and somewhere between the house and the road, or between a personal care home and the street, a vulnerable senior has gone missing. Maybe it is the father who has farmed the same land for 50 years, or maybe it is the grandmother who has raised children, helped raise grandchildren, volunteers at the church and still knows the names of half the people in town. One day, because of dementia or another vulnerability, that person walks out the door and does not come home when expected. For the family, the world changes in an instant. The shoes are gone, and the door is unlocked. Someone checks the garage, and someone checks the street. Someone drives the road that they know someone would take into town. Someone phones the RCMP. Neighbours start looking. People shine headlights into ditches, down lanes and around farmyards. In that moment, time is not a number; it is the space between what can still be done and what may never be undone. Hours matter. Minutes matter. That is why this bill matters so much. Bill C-263 would require the federal government to develop a national framework to support a coordinated silver alert system across the country. A silver alert is an emergency notification used to inform the public when a vulnerable older person, including someone living with dementia, has gone missing and when public assistance may help locate that person as quickly as possible. It is much like an Amber Alert, and having this system in place is common sense. The bill could help save lives. It is the kind of measure the House should be able to support across party lines. It deals with the safety and dignity of vulnerable Canadians and the peace of mind of the families who love them so much. The bill begins from a reality that every province is facing: Canada's population is aging, and dementia is becoming more common, unfortunately. More families are caring for parents, grandparents, spouses and neighbours who may still live with independence and dignity but who can also face moments of confusion and disorientation. Any of us who has had or currently has family members battling dementia recognizes how important that independence is, and the worry that comes with knowing how difficult it can be for them. The bill notes that nearly one million Canadians will be living with dementia by 2030, and more than 1.7 million by 2050. Those numbers are large, but behind every number is a family trying to keep someone safe. The bill also points to a rather terrifying fact: If a person living with dementia is not found within 12 hours of going missing, there is a 50% probability that they will be found dead by drowning or will suffer severe or fatal hypothermia or dehydration. In Manitoba, we understand what the cold can mean. We know what cold weather does to a person. We know how quickly a person can disappear from sight on a gravel road, along a highway, around a farmyard or at the edge of town. In Portage—Lisgar, our communities are unbelievably generous and neighbourly. When someone is in trouble, people will show up. When crisis strikes, they will bring trucks, flashlights, side-by-side, snowmobiles, local knowledge and whatever else is necessary to help. They know the roads. They know which yard has an old shed. They know the area somebody might turn to if confused. That community instinct is one of rural Manitoba's greatest strengths, but instinct needs information. Good people cannot help find someone if they do not know whom they are looking for, where they were last seen, what they may be wearing and whether or not a vehicle was involved. A silver alert is not a replacement for police. It is not a replacement for family. It is a tool that helps them move faster and together. One of the strengths of the bill is that it does not try to invent a new bureaucracy. It would direct the minister to develop a national framework that uses existing infrastructure for public alerts. Everyone already understands that when an emergency alert comes through their phone, they should pay attention. The bill says that we should coordinate when a vulnerable senior is missing and when the public can help make a difference. That is just common sense. The clock does not care which level of government owns which responsibility. When the risk is real, the response must be fast and coordinated, without unnecessary delay. The bill also respects the role of provinces. It would require the minister to consult provinces, and with police forces that issue the alerts. That is the right approach. The people closest to these cases must help shape the system in order to protect the people in need. Police know how missing persons investigations work. Provinces know their own emergency systems. Care providers understand the realities of dementia. The federal role should be to help coordinate, not dominate, provinces and municipalities. This is an important Conservative principle. We should not pretend every answer can be fixed by the federal government. The best answer here will come from coordination, standards, sharing best practices and respect for the people who are already on the ground doing the work. The bill also understands the need for safeguards. Public alerts are powerful tools because they are rare, targeted and credible, and Canadians take them seriously. If they are overused, people start tuning them out. If they are poorly designed, they can violate privacy or create confusion. Bill C-263 would make sure there is one clear, consistent set of rules for deciding when a silver alert should be issued so families and police are not left dealing with a patchwork system. That includes whether there are reasonable grounds to believe the missing person's health or safety is at risk and whether sharing information with the public is likely to help locate them. Importantly, the bill also calls for geographically targeted alerts as well as interprovincial alerts, because both are necessary. In a large country, a targeted alert can be more effective than a blanketed alert. If someone goes missing in southern Manitoba, the most useful alert may be directed just to a particular region, highway, town or a surrounding area. However, we also know that people do move. Vehicles cross borders and highways connect communities. A person missing in Manitoba could be headed toward Saskatchewan or anywhere along a route familiar to them. A coordinated system must account for that. The bill would also require privacy guidelines for the personal information that may be disclosed for the duration of the alert. An effective system must disclose enough to assist with the search, but not more than the situation requires. There is also a public education component. An alert is only as effective as the public response it creates. Canadians need to know what a silver alert means, what to look for, what to do and how to report information. In small communities, this can be especially important, because people notice the little details. They notice a person walking alone in the cold, thinking it is a little strange. They notice a vehicle stopped in an unusual place they would not normally see one parked. They notice when something just simply is not right. I also want to speak about the seniors at the heart of this bill. They are not just statistics. They are the people who built this country in very practical ways. In Manitoba, they are the people who raised families. They volunteered at legions, churches and community halls and kept our small towns alive. They are the people who showed up for others when it mattered most. When they become vulnerable, we should do our minimum and show up for them. I know MPs may come at this issue from different perspectives. Some will think of large cities where a person can disappear into crowds, a busy transit station or a bustling hub of the community on the street. Some will think of more northern, remote communities where terrain and weather can be absolutely unforgiving. I think of rural Manitoba, where distance can become a danger very quickly. The fear of losing a vulnerable parent or grandparent is not partisan, is not urban and is not rural. It is simply human. The bill would give us a chance to do something useful, not just symbolic, but useful. It would require a framework within one year. It would require the framework to be tabled in Parliament and published publicly. It would require a review of the effectiveness within two years. That would give Parliament a way to hold the government accountable for whether the framework is working, whether it needs updates or whether it is helping in the way it was intended. That accountability matters, because families do not need just another vague promise. They need a system that is well thought out, coordinated and ready for use. When a vulnerable person disappears, the first question should not be whether the system knows what to do. The first answer should be action. I will be proudly supporting this bill because it is the right thing to do for vulnerable seniors, for police and for our communities, like the one I represent in Portage—Lisgar. I urge all members across party lines to support this important legislation.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-05

“I want the government to get out of the way and let businesses build more. The government should admit it is the problem and change its own restrictive laws.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, our businesses thrive despite Liberal taxes and over-regulation. The Liberals know exactly why we cannot build big things in this country. They critiqued themselves in their own discussion document, finally admitting the truth. It states, “federal laws have rules that can make regulatory processes slow”. Simply put, it is the Liberals' own antidevelopment laws that are the problem. It is clearer than ever that this is all just a Liberal illusion. The Prime Minister wants to keep our oil and gas in the ground just as much as Justin Trudeau did. Does the Prime Minister have the courage to fix the mess the Liberals have created, or does he just hope that empty promises will get things built again?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm blaming the other party for bad policies that block big projects. I'm saying it's their fault things aren't getting built like they promised. I want them to admit their policies are wrong and change the laws so big projects can go ahead.”

Statements by Members

Prairie Farmers

2026-06-02

“Farmers work hard to feed us. I thank the farm families. I hope they have a good season.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is a time of year on the Prairies when the alarm clock is mostly just for show because the work starts long before it rings. In Manitoba, the last few weeks have thrown just about everything at us, including snow, sleet and wind that tried to relocate about half of the province. The plan can be made, the equipment ready and the fields waiting, and they will still end up in a fight with the weather. Farmers do not get to press pause; only the weather can do that. That is farming. They repair equipment, seed, spray, fuel up, pray for rain, pray for sun and then get up the next morning and do it all over again. Through it all, farm families just keep going. That is just what they do. It may surprise some to learn that food does not magically show up on the grocery store shelves. It starts with families that take risks most people never see. It is parents, kids, siblings, grandparents and neighbours trying to pull together through long days and late nights for the kind of work that simply needs to get done. We thank the farm families who feed our country and keep rural Canada thriving. I wish them all a safe and prosperous season.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Private Members' Business

Offender Rehabilitation Act

2026-06-01

“I want to look like I care about addiction and crime. This bill will make prisons force people to get treatment. That's good. But we also need to punish drug dealers. This is how we'll fix the problem. Everyone should vote for this bill.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured that my colleague from Kitchener Centre asked me to speak on her legislation, Bill C-240, the offender rehabilitation act. Before I begin, I would like to congratulate her hometown team, the Kitchener Rangers, on winning the Memorial Cup last night. Well done, lads. The hon. member's opening speech on the legislation is worth watching for anyone but especially for someone struggling with addiction right now. I commend her for her courage in telling her own personal story of recovery. The fact that she is in this place is a testament to her as a person but also highlights what can be achieved in recovery. Bill C-240 starts with a common-sense idea that I think all Canadians can rally behind. Prison should protect the public, and prisons should hold offenders accountable. Prisons should also require that people do the work needed to change before they are released back into our communities. Canadians can see the problem quite plainly. The person who broke the law gets endless second chances while the victims in the community are left paying the price. Repeat offenders cycle through the system, with trauma not healed, addictions getting worse and too many people leaving prison no better prepared for life outside than the day they entered. That helps no one, not the victim, not the community and especially not the offender. A serious justice system tells the offender the truth. They caused harm. They are responsible and now they must do the work to change. To the victim, it has to say something just as clearly: that what happened to them matters and that their safety should come before the offender's convenience. The legislation would give judges a new tool. When a judge sentences an offender, they would be able to order that offender to take rehabilitative measures during their time in jail. That could mean job training. It could mean apprenticeship or technical skills. It could mean education and, most importantly, it could mean treatment for drugs and alcohol addiction. Right now, too often, prison is treated like a waiting room. The offender serves their time and waits out the clock. They then return to the same streets, the same addiction, the same lack of skills, the same broken life and the same risk to public safety. Too many Canadians are tired of this revolving-door justice system. When someone is released from jail, they move into a neighbourhood full of people who have every right to expect that our justice system has done more than simply count down the days on a calendar. The bill would help change that. It says that if a judge orders an offender to take training, education or treatment, that order should not just be forgotten once the offender actually enters jail. The order should be sent to Correctional Services Canada. It should be reflected in the correctional plan. When parole is being considered, the parole board should be able to look at whether there was progress made. The bill does not pretend that every offender will change. It does not punish someone because the program is full, unavailable or delayed. It does say that if help is offered, if training is available, if there is a path to a better life, the offender has a responsibility to take it. If someone wants early release, Canadians are entitled to ask what they have done with the time they were given. Did they learn a trade? Did they put in work to overcome their addiction? Did they show any sign that they are any safer today than when they entered prison? Release should be earned through progress and should not be automatic. It should not be detached from behaviour, effort or rehabilitation. I come at this from a Manitoban perspective. In my province, these problems are very real. Families in Portage la Prairie, Winkler, Morden, Altona, Carman and communities right across our great province know what repeat crime looks like and what it does. They see the addiction, the stolen trucks, the break-ins, the violence and the heartbreak that follows. In 2024, Manitoba's crime severity index was far above the national average. People do not need a chart telling them that something has gone badly wrong. They feel it when they check two or three times whether the garage is closed or the car is locked. They feel it when a business owner replaces a broken window yet again. They feel it when parents wonder whether their community is safe for their kids. They especially feel it when police are arresting the same person over and over again. Manitobans are now being told that the answer to addiction is a drug consumption site in Winnipeg. It is absolutely not. Let us be honest about what many families and businesses fear. They worry that it will become another drug den, another place where government manages decline instead of enabling recovery. They worry that the neighbourhood will be asked to carry the cost. Local concerns will be brushed aside by people who call themselves compassionate, while ignoring the fear of the grandmother, the shop owner, the student, the young family and the police officer dealing with the fallout. They base this on what we have already seen take place across the country where this experiment has been tried. The answer to addiction is not to build a system around permanent dependency, but recovery through treatment, because we know it can work, the kind of treatment that helps those suffering with addiction find purpose and meaning in life. They need treatment that helps them deal with trauma and understand what they are trying to escape and why. They need treatment to recognize, through whatever modality that works, that they have a problem, that it can be solved and that recovery is possible. The answer is a justice system that separates the addicted person who needs help from the fentanyl trafficker who profits from death and misery, and that deals firmly with both problems. Bill C-240 does just that. It says that people struggling with addiction should be directed toward treatment and rehabilitation. It also says that those who are trafficking fentanyl on a large scale deserve tougher sentencing consequences. That distinction is necessary. The person trapped in addiction needs a path out. The person selling poison on our streets needs consequences. That is why this bill is both tough and humane. It is tough because it refuses to accept a justice system that releases people without asking whether they have actually changed in any way. It is humane because prisons should not just hold people for a while and then send them back out broken, addicted and dangerous. Many offenders enter custody without the basic education or skills needed to find and keep stable work. Many have never had the discipline, support and structure needed to build an honest life. None of that excuses crime in any way, but if we ignore those facts we guarantee more crime. Someone who cannot read well, cannot hold a job, cannot manage their addiction with coping skills and has spent their sentence learning absolutely nothing about recovery is not safer nor rehabilitated because a date arrived on a calendar. They need to put in the work while incarcerated. The public deserves more than a release date. The public deserves evidence of effort. Some will say that this is too hard on offenders. I say it is more cruel to leave people trapped in the same spiral that they are in and call it mercy. Nobody wants to be addicted to drugs or alcohol. Let us make sure they have a way out. Some will say that we need more programs before judges can order participation. Then let us expand the programs. Let us fix prison education and make sure training matches real labour market needs. In Manitoba, we understand the trades. We understand work. We understand the dignity in people showing up and earning their way. If somebody in custody can learn and go through addiction recovery, then that should not be treated as an optional extra but as the goal. It should be part of the sentence when the judge says that it is needed. We should want people leaving custody with clear eyes, a plan and a reason to not go back; to have hit rock bottom and started the work to claw their way up to a life filled with meaning, purpose and service. The bill sends a message to offenders that their time in custody must not be wasted. It sends a message to Correctional Service Canada that rehabilitation must be planned, tracked and taken seriously. It sends a message to parole boards that progress matters. It sends a message to fentanyl traffickers that if they profit from addiction and death they will face real consequences, as they should. Most importantly, it sends a message to victims and communities that their safety and peace of mind matters. The justice system exists for the protection of the public, not for the convenience of the offender. We need a justice system that is serious enough to punish crime and honest enough to say that rehabilitation only matters when it is real. Some offenders absolutely can change, but they should not be rewarded for just saying the right things. They should be expected to do the very hard work that change requires. Bill C-240 is not the final word on earned release, public safety or recovery, but it is a serious step in the right direction. It follows the offender from courtroom, to custody, to parole and asks a fair question at every stage: Are they doing the work necessary? The bill forces the justice system to take rehabilitation seriously. If we are going to release people back into our communities, then it is fair to ask what they have done with the time they were given on the inside. Canadians want a justice system that remembers the victims, protects the public and expects and enables more from the offender than simply waiting for the calendar to run out. That is why I will be supporting this important piece of legislation. I urge every member of this House to do the same.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Aerospace Industry

2026-05-29

“The company you gave $20 million to was nearly bankrupt. Its chair then sold shares and made $1.8 million. Canada is in a recession. You're burning over $50,000 a day on this space program. Stop wasting our money!”

“I want to blame the government for wasting money on a rocket pad. Someone is getting rich off taxpayers. I don't like that.”

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-05-28

“I don't like the CRTC getting more power. I don't trust it. Now it's taxing people and it might hurt business. The government should be careful with its entertainment policies and protect affordability.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think we should all be so proud. I heard the names of a few bands shouted out. However, this is not about not supporting Canadian artists. I think there is a role to play. This is about the CRTC's being handed a suite of powers by the Liberal government, saying that there is no chance, as a regulator, that it is going to overstep its boundaries, but then it went ahead and did that. The CRTC has imposed, at a terrible time, this new tax upon Canadians that is ultimately more likely going to drive away investment than create the opportunity for another Hallmark film to be made in Morden. This is about common-sense policy and making sure we are protecting the affordability of entertainment made by Canadians for Canadians.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The CRTC can't just tax online platforms and expect them to absorb the cost. They'll pass it on to Canadian consumers. I want a fair system where all content creators can compete, not just big players with special deals.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with my Bloc colleague on how bad the Liberals have been on their trade negotiations with the United States for the master negotiator to have achieved absolutely nothing so far except giving up elements of Canadian sovereignty and wealth. However, the member raised the issue of the money that the CRTC says it is going to create. Of course, that is what a tax does, but I fail to understand why it is believed in the House, or why any rational person would believe, that this is free money and that all of a sudden these big companies are just going to voluntarily not pass those costs on but say, “You know what, we should help out Canadian content. We'll just do this out of the goodness of our heart because we're a charity.” They are not charities. They are private enterprises. As much as I want Canadians to compete on the big streaming services, I want to give every content creator across any platform who wants to educate or to offer entertainment around the world the same opportunity, and not just let the big players take advantage of a system that is so confusing for everybody who tries to deal with the CRTC.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want the government to stop interfering with online speech and picking winners and losers. The government should let all Canadian content creators have the opportunity to succeed without navigating complex CRTC rules and funding.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is usually here, but he must have stepped out, because he has not listened to the speech I just gave. My point is that the government should not be picking winners and losers. I have absolutely no faith when it comes to the Liberal Government's efforts to previously censor what we see and say online. In fact, I would love it if my local news creators could share any of their news stories on any Meta platform, but thanks to this government's terrible legislation, they are no longer able to do that. My point is this: Let all of us, Canadian content creators of all types, the up-and-comers, not just the established creators who know how to operate the maze of CRTC rules to get special funding, have the opportunity to succeed, share our stories loudly and proudly, not just in Canada but around the world.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗