MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Chris Lewis

Follow by RSS

Lewis pushes for Windsor-Essex auto workers facing layoffs, more transparency on major projects, and relief from taxes and living costs for seniors and young families. He argues through personal and constituent stories — “One senior wrote to me” — using them to put a face on costs. Writes from party talking points at times, framing budgets as “just another Liberal”.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
B+
80 / 100 over 13 statements
Signal 64 / 100
Relevance 69 / 100
Respect 100 / 100
Clarity 98 / 100
Averaged over the 13 of 14 statements graded so far.

In their own words

Statements 14

Government Orders ·

Building Canada Strong Act

In response to a question from Maxime Blanchette-Joncas

“Over the next three weeks, 6,400 people in Windsor-Essex will lose their jobs right before Christmas. National projects never get started, and I care about those workers.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 10 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there was a bit of a delay, but I believe I got the majority of the question from my colleague down the aisle. I will do my very best to answer it. Over the next three weeks, 6,400 people in Windsor-Essex will face being out of work right before Christmas. That is 6,400 people who can forget about a Thanksgiving dinner, because that is long gone, and who are going to have to figure out what it will look like under the tree. We can talk all day long about the national projects that, quite frankly, never get started, and I respect my colleague, but I am really concerned about those 6,400 workers.

In response to a question from Dan Albas

“The government is not open enough. It blocks our requests for studies, and it does not give good answers to the people we represent. My party will keep pushing for more transparency.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, to the hon. member, my very dear colleague, quite frankly, no, there is not enough transparency from the government. We continue to fall short. Every time we ask for a study, it is usually blocked at committee. When we get answers from the government on behalf of all of our constituents across many ridings in Ontario specifically, they always fall short. The answer is that we need way more transparency. We are here as the official opposition, and we will continue to work for that transparency.

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“The government claims it gets things built, but that is not true. It funded an electric vehicle battery plant in Windsor, but the plant has not produced a single battery. The government spends money without getting results.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, do I not recognize it? There is a funny thing called the battery plant in Windsor that was designed for electric vehicles because of the government. Not one electric vehicle battery has been sent out of that plant. If we are going to invest in something, we should at least follow through with the investment. I find it a bit shallow for the member across the aisle to talk about getting things done when the government has had nearly 12 years to get things done, and nothing has gotten done after money is put forth.

“I do not want this bill to pass as it is. It makes huge changes to labour laws without asking the workers who will be affected, and it rushes those changes into a 250-page bill. It does nothing to help the thousands of auto workers facing layoffs in Windsor. It also gives one minister too much power over international bridges without enough oversight.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as I almost always do, I want to thank my Lord and Saviour for the opportunity to stand in this amazing place and to serve. Before I get into Bill C-39, I want to say happy birthday to my eldest son, Jagger. His birthday was yesterday and I was not home to celebrate it, but I am awful proud of him. Happy birthday to him. I am pleased to rise today on behalf of the wonderful, hard-working people of Essex to talk about Liberal omnibus bill, Bill C-39. This bill is almost 250 pages long, addressing everything from supply chain and transport corridor management to changing how collective bargaining would work. This massive bill proposes changes to 21 different pieces of legislation. My Conservative colleagues and I continue to examine every line of this bill, judging it on a simple, foundational standard. Would it protect Canadian jobs and save working families money? I will recognize that there are very serious changes being proposed to the Labour Code in part 3 that will require extensive study at committee. They would affect federally regulated sectors like railways, ports and banking. Why did the government choose to hide these major labour provisions inside a 250-page omnibus bill instead of presenting them in dedicated legislation for proper committee scrutiny? It is tough for me to wrap my head around why the government is trying to rush these significant changes in an omnibus bill instead of allowing them to be properly and thoroughly studied at committee. Major concerns have been raised about these proposed changes to the Labour Code, yet there were no consultations with key sector representatives or affected workers before this bill was tabled. The Liberals used section 107 of the Canada Labour Code to order flight attendants back to work, effectively sending them back to work unpaid. Having previously used section 107 to order flight attendants back to work unpaid, the government should not be making further unscrutinized changes to section 107 behind closed doors. What is most staggering about this massive, 250-page bill is not what it contains, but what it leaves out. While the government addresses unionized workers in federal ports and airports, there is absolutely nothing in this bill for the Windsor auto workers at Stellantis. As we sit in the House, Stellantis is facing an upcoming three-week production layoff at the Windsor assembly plant this month. This means that approximately 6,400 auto workers in or near my riding are facing layoffs right before Christmas, and there is nothing here for them. The government has offered them zero support. These auto workers need certainty. It seems that Stellantis is perhaps getting ready to leave Canada when it comes to auto production because of U.S. tariffs, among many other things, but the Liberal government has already left it behind. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to negotiate for these workers? The Prime Minister promised that he would have a deal with the U.S. by July 2025. The Windsor auto sector is getting hollowed out because of the Prime Minister’s incompetence and his failure to lower his elbows and shake hands. The Conservatives will continue to fight for policies that defend our auto workers and protect these vital Canadian jobs. Finally, I must highlight the government’s proposed changes to the International Bridges and Tunnels Act in Bill C-39. Previously, structural or operational alterations to an international bridge required full federal cabinet approval, but this bill would strip that authority from the federal cabinet and give it directly to the Minister of Transport. That would give a whole lot of power to the Minister of Transport to make some pretty significant changes without proper checks and balances. If my memory serves me correctly, the Gordie Howe bridge, near my riding, which borders one of the biggest international border crossings in Canada, was clouded with secret backdoor conversations about its opening. My colleague from Windsor West publicly raised concerns about the urgency of finding answers and getting clarity on when the bridge would be opened, and specifically asked the Minister of Transport for answers on multiple occasions without a response. If I also recall correctly, the Prime Minister claimed that the debts Canadians incurred to build the Gordie Howe bridge would be fully repaid before we began sharing tolls with the United States, and we know now that that was also false. Do Canadians really want to give more authority or decision-making power to the Minister of Transport given the track record with the Gordie Howe bridge? Under Bill C-39, the Minister of Transport would not be subject to the same parliamentary oversight that would apply to Governor in Council orders and regulations. With decision-making power resting in one minister, that would make the minister more accessible to private bridge operators or regional interests. If my memory serves me correctly, the Liberal government held private meetings with Ambassador Bridge lobbyists ahead of the Gordie Howe bridge opening, yet the Liberal government is now proposing to remove parliamentary accountability for international bridges through this bill. Why should we give the Minister of Transport more authority to make decisions when his government’s track record already shows that it does not have the best interests of Canadians in mind? I could speak for a long time on Bill C-39. There is much in Bill C-39 that requires rigorous study and much that remains deeply concerning. What I can promise the automakers and families of Essex and Windsor is that Conservatives will never stop fighting for their jobs, for their economic certainty and for a fair deal with the United States, because at the end of the day, Essex residents have made enough sacrifices at the hands of the government.

Statements by Members ·

Seniors

“Seniors in my riding and across Canada cannot afford food, heat, and other basics. Life costs too much under this government. Conservatives want to cut foreign aid and government waste so seniors can keep more of their money.”
  • A repeated line

    “People are struggling to make ends meet.”

    Said 13 times by 10 members since April 27.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the seniors in Essex, who, after a lifetime of hard work, paying taxes and supporting both older and younger generations, are now struggling to make ends meet. One senior wrote to me, “With the rising cost of living in all aspects of our economy: food, gas, utilities, insurance, taxes, we are finding it increasingly difficult to afford even the basic items of necessity and comfort, let alone luxuries.” Across Essex and throughout Canada, seniors are being forced to make impossible choices. They deserve better. The Liberals are out of touch while Canadians are out of money. Conservatives have a plan to bring spending under control by cutting wasteful bureaucracy and foreign aid and to deliver relief to hard-working Canadians so seniors can keep more of their hard-earned money and enjoy the retirement that they have earned.

Government Orders ·

Combatting Hate Act

“I want to ask my colleague what is missing from this bill. What needs to be added to keep people safe?”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 28 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is an awfully heavy day in the House today, when we are supposed to collectively be trying to bring peace and unity not only to Canada, but to the world. Hearing the heckling toward my hon. colleague is pretty darn embarrassing. Equally, though, I am darn proud of the member for standing up for what is right. What is not in the bill, or what is totally missing? What needs to be put in the bill to ensure that people are safe?

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

In response to a question from Rhéal Éloi Fortin

“Young people in my area feel they can never afford a home. Gas prices and living costs are too high. I want to know what message the government has for these young people who are trying to get ahead.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 47 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 37 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have spoken at length, almost ad nauseam, with young adults in Essex. Basically, it has come to a point now where they are saying it is not even worth trying to save for a home. What I really found interesting was when the member talked about what we would say to the person at the gas pump. That really resonated with me. What is the message? What is the proper message? What do I send back to these young adults who are just trying to get ahead in Canada?

In response to a question from Xavier Barsalou-Duval

“I will not support raising taxes on the people in my riding. We need sensible solutions instead so future generations have good opportunities.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of respect for the hon. member. I do have to smile a little, because at the end of the day, I cannot go back in good faith to the residents of Essex, look them in the eye and say that we are actually putting more taxes on them because it is the right thing to do. I cannot do that. None of us can do that. What we need to do is come up with common-sense solutions, such as the very one being proposed today, to ensure that future generations have the same opportunity going forward as each and every one of us to hopefully leave the world a better place than we found it. That is our job, that is why we are here and that is why we bring up these very strong suggestions.

In response to a question from Jeremy Patzer

“I agree with the member. High fuel taxes have made food at the grocery store much more expensive, and people need more relief.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member gets it. He really understands exactly what people are facing. I would suggest that the $20 he is speaking about should be $40, because the price of food at the grocery store has been affected because there is so much tax on fuel. People need the extra $20 to maybe buy some food that would not cost the same as the food we bought perhaps three, four or five years ago. Yes, I completely agree with the member, and I appreciate the fact that he truthfully understands what the issue is.

In response to a question from Carlos Leitão

“Life has become too expensive for everyone. Regular young people cannot afford to do things and just want a fair chance.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 24 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member’s question was very respectful. I believe all 343 members of Parliament can probably point to local stories in their own ridings about the cost of everything these days. One of my favourite things I love to do is spend time with my sons and, when their buddies come over after a day of fishing or perhaps a day of hunting, listen to their stories. They are not talking about people who are overly privileged. They are talking about their own lives today and the very fact that they cannot afford to go somewhere or cannot afford to do something. They just want an opportunity going forward. I appreciate the question, but quite frankly, it affects all of us.

In response to a question from Mario Beaulieu

“I want the government to remove all federal taxes on gas and diesel for the rest of the year, including the GST. I also want it to permanently cancel the clean fuel standard. Life is too expensive for people in my riding, and high fuel costs make everything else cost more.”
  • A repeated line

    “Permanently scrap the clean fuel standard.”

    Said 6 times by 6 members since May 26.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as always, it is just such an honour to serve the amazing, hard-working residents of Essex who have put their trust in me to be their voice in this very uncertain time. As I always say, I will continue to give all praise to my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Without Him, nothing is possible. I want to say thanks so much to the amazing member for Prince Albert for his passion and his compassion for the residents of his area. I have not been able to visit his riding yet, although I hope to one day, but I have seen his work in action when he has come down to my riding. I want to thank him so much for his vision, his leadership and, quite frankly, his mentorship for myself. It is not often that many of us have a whole bunch of friends, but a very dear friend of mine is going through an awful tough time right now. Her name is Fran Rankin. I just want to ensure that Fran Rankin’s name is put on record in the Hansard. She is the most lovely wife to one of my other best friends, Mark Rankin. I just want her to know that we love her, Essex loves her, and we are bringing all our passion and support for her. I will get into the business of the day. Really, what I am speaking about today is what I think about when I look at my children, who are 26, 25 and 23. I also have a grandchild, Levi, who just turned five. I think about the future we are leaving them. What legacy are we leaving for future generations? I always go back to this. I believe they just, quite frankly, do not have the same opportunity that we had growing up. I bought my first house for $149,900 and had zero clue how I was going to pay for it. It was a brand new house with a finished concrete driveway. I thought, how in the world is this even possible? That was some 25 years ago. Unfortunately, what I am hearing now is more of, “Why even bother anymore? I just can’t get ahead.” That is wildly sad. I rise today to address a glaring disconnect between the government’s rhetoric and the lived reality of Canadians. While the Liberal government has prioritized the word “affordable”, over four dozen times in budget 2025, for the people I represent, that word is losing its meaning. “Affordable” and “affordability” are good words, but they have begun to ring hollow for families because they lack concrete action. As a man of my word, I am urging the government to make good on its word and ensure that affordability actually translates into relief that Canadians can feel. I know the government has claimed that it has acted faster and more comprehensively than our global peer countries in response to the increased price in gas, but in Essex, “faster” is not how we describe the rise in the cost of living, and “comprehensive” is not how we describe a tax relief plan that ignores the reality at the pump. I know the government has offered to cut taxes on fuel, which, by the way, affects only a third of the taxes on gas for a third of the year. While the Prime Minister has said that affordability is better now than it has been in recent years, the families in my riding are telling a different story. Today, I am here to provide a reality check for the government and paint a picture of what affordability would actually look like for Essex residents by telling this House a few stories from real, everyday people who have written to me this year asking for help. Consider a female auto worker in our region who writes, “As a person living in Kingsville, who commutes to Windsor five, sometimes even six times a week for work, I am asking you to help make life more affordable for your fellow Canadians. The price of gas is at an all-time high, and [the Prime Minister] is blind to what Canadians are currently going through: the lack of affordability and the cost of living crisis.” She is not asking for more rhetoric. She said, “I am reaching out to you today to ask that you help remove the tax on gas.” Further, in Belle River, the frustration is tied to our energy independence: “We need help with gas prices, especially when our gas doesn’t come from the Middle East.” These are not isolated complaints. They are cries for help from a region under immense pressure. When gas prices soar, they act as a tax on every single sector in our economy. As one father in Essex noted, “To the untrained eye there seems to be very little action to control the gas prices we are currently seeing and the resulting increase in the price of everything else a family needs to live. In my family, we have three jobs just to make ends meet. Why is the government not being more proactive in helping the current situation be more manageable for the hard-working middle- and lower-class families?” In Amherstburg, that anxiety is turning into fear: “gas prices [are] currently getting to a level that is placing a significant financial burden on families.... For many of us in Essex County, driving is a necessity for work, school, and daily life. My fear is that...these prices will continue to rise, and start affecting other commodities such as food and other necessities.” My constituents are right to be afraid. In Windsor-Essex, where our manufacturing and tool and die sectors are already facing an existential threat from foreign tariffs, high fuel costs are a weight they cannot carry. At the end of the day, the price at the pumps directly correlates with the cost of shipping food, homebuilding and the food that families can afford on the table. Affordability is not just a word for Essex residents. It is something they desperately need. This is why we are calling on the House to end all federal taxes on gas and diesel for the rest of the year, including the GST, and permanently scrap the clean fuel standard. We must answer this Essex father’s question: “Why is the government not being more proactive in helping the current situation be more manageable for the hard-working middle- and lower-class families?” The government cannot claim that it lacks resources. It pocketed $8 billion in revenue windfall from high global oil prices, roughly $2 billion for every $10 increase on the price of a barrel, yet the response has been nothing shy of chump change. While the Liberals claim that affordability is better than it has been in years, their recent tax cut saved only 10¢ per litre on gas and four cents per litre on diesel. In contrast, the Conservative motion to cut costs at the pump by 25¢ per litre and save a family of four $1,218 per year is a common-sense solution. I know that because Australia, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Germany and Austria, to name a few countries, have already moved to cut fuel taxes or provide direct relief at the pump. Even our neighbours to the south have a competitive advantage because of these taxes. Canadians pay nearly 20% more for fuel than Americans: 20¢ more. The burden on diesel, the fuel that powers our farmers and our supply chains, is even more nonsensical. As a resident in Amherstburg asked, “How is it possible that we are allowing the oil industry to charge more for diesel than for gasoline fuel?” The answer is clear. Diesel is more expensive because the Liberals have added more tax on diesel: a 10¢ federal excise tax, eight cents of GST and a seven-cent clean fuel standard. One Essex resident wrote me, “If diesel fuel comes down in cost, the transportation of goods will be less, which in effect should lower the cost of goods available for sale.” I could not agree more. The government needs to exit its utopian world, where we just jet-set around the world and have conversations and photo ops, and instead look at what is happening on Canadian soil. In closing, I am asking the government to let the middle class succeed by cutting all federal taxes on gas and diesel for the rest of the year, including the GST, and permanently scrap the clean fuel standard. Is it too much to ask? The Liberals have already profited $8 billion from windfall tax revenues. What we are proposing will save a family of four $1,218. As the member of Parliament for Essex, I am asking the House to listen to the voices of Essex residents and hear their struggles. They are hopeful, but they cannot hold the line forever.

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“The government's budget adds too much debt and raises taxes. I want to know when the government will stop this spending so life is affordable.”
  • A repeated line

    “The Prime Minister doubled Justin Trudeau's deficit.”

    Said 10 times by 10 members since April 27.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I rise again to share what a resident in Essex wrote to me: “Just want to express my deep concerns with...the direction that Canada is heading. I did not think it could get worse than Trudeau”. My response is this. This costly credit card budget means more debt. The Liberal Prime Minister doubled Trudeau’s deficit. There is more spending and there are more taxes. He is just another Liberal. When will the government end its costly spending so Canadians can afford to live?

Statements by Members ·

Birthday Congratulations

“I want to wish a happy 85th birthday to my former grade 5 teacher, Pauline Robinet. She was a great mentor to me, and I thank her for everything she has done.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Saturday was a special day of celebration of an amazing woman, mentor and friend. Mrs. Pauline Robinet was my grade 5 teacher at St. John de Brebeuf school in Kingsville. She has been instrumental in my life journey. Stern but fair, passionate and compassionate, she strived to create best outcomes for her students. After I got a perfect report card, I wrote Mrs. Robinet a letter stating that if I did not become a priest, I wanted to marry her. I have the great honour of speaking to grade 5 and grade 10 civics classes across Essex. Our teachers today are equally special and want the very best for their students. I thank Sister Mary Denise, Mrs. Robinet, for all she has done and continues to do, and I wish a happy 85th birthday to her, Mrs. R. Our world is a better place because of her.

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“Life is not more affordable for people in my area. The Prime Minister added $90 billion in spending, which raised debt and taxes. When will he stop spending so much money and lower the deficit?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I received an email from a resident of Essex who said, “...the Prime Minister stated that life is becoming more affordable.... For many [Essex] residents, it does not feel like affordability has improved.” Instead, this Prime Minister has added $90 billion in new spending, driving up debt, costs and taxes for Canadians. He is just another Liberal. When will the Prime Minister rein in reckless spending of our taxpayer dollars and take real action to reduce the deficit?