Gérard Deltell · TranslatePolitics.ca

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-18

“Look at all these numbers that make the government look bad. Can the Prime Minister defend himself?”

“You've been in power a year. The economy is worse. G7 neighbors are doing better. I want you to admit that out loud.”

Oral Questions

Canada Revenue Agency

2026-06-16

“The Canada Revenue Agency lets tax evaders hack honest people. The minister should say how many hack cases they are investigating.”

Oral Questions

Taxation

2026-06-15

“I want people to vote for me because I will help them buy used cars.”

Government Orders

2026-06-15

“Yes I'm not here to debate Quebec separation. Lucien Bouchard says maybe we shouldn't rush into a new referendum. Should you listen to him?”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his remarks. He began by marking the 35th anniversary of the Bloc Québécois. I would therefore like to wish everyone in the Bloc Québécois a happy anniversary. Clearly, I am not about to debate the matter, but, since he quoted Lucien Bouchard, I would also like to quote him. Last August, Lucien Bouchard stated that he was not in favour of holding a referendum right away. He said the following: I trust in Mr. Plamondon's [the leader of the Parti Québécois] sound judgment to reconsider the matter and make a decision that is in the public interest... I'm not look to cause him any trouble, but I think Mr. Plamondon should think very carefully before sticking to his commitment to hold a referendum... Does my colleague agree with Lucien Bouchard?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I congratulated my colleague for his speech. I also acknowledged some politicians who are leaving. I want my colleague to talk more about how Air Canada staff were already prepared to apply certain rules before they were even debated in Parliament.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate and thank my colleague from Mirabel for his speech. He began by acknowledging Sylvie D'Amours, who, after three terms as an MNA, will not be running again. I would also like to acknowledge Ms. D'Amours, as well as my provincial colleagues. I would like to acknowledge Éric Caire, who is leaving politics after 19 years, Mario Asselin, who is leaving politics after eight years as an MNA, and Sylvain Lévesque, who is leaving politics after ten years as an MNA. My colleague touched briefly on a point, and I would like him to elaborate on it. He said that Air Canada staff were already prepared to apply certain rules that had not yet been tabled in Parliament, let alone debated or even adopted. Can the member tell us more about this?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Private Members' Business

Income Tax Act

2026-06-15

“I want people and companies to keep more of their money. This bill will encourage businesses to use waste heat. Wind and solar energy aren't the answer to everything. The greenest cars are used cars. Taxing used cars repeatedly is bad for the environment and consumers. We should put more money in people's pockets and give businesses more funds to reinvest in greener operations. This approach is feasible and the government should view it as a green approach, just like wind turbines and solar energy.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in this debate on Bill C‑269, which was tabled by my colleague from Calgary Centre. One thing I can say is that I have known my colleague very well for seven years now. He was first elected in 2019. He has an MBA, he has a strong grasp of numbers, and he knows the energy sector inside out. This bill addresses precisely these very important issues, namely energy and taxation, as well as their economic and environmental dimensions. Before I continue, I want to acknowledge my colleague from Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, who mentioned earlier that there was a power outage on the north shore. Things are bad when the Manic-5 generating station is down. Needless to say, the people at Hydro-Québec will be sorting this out. Bill C‑269 targets several extremely important objectives. Its first objective concerns the environment. Everyone agrees that we need to reduce our carbon footprint and take a much more environmentally friendly approach. We all agree on that, but the way to win people over is definitely not by imposing or forcing things on them. Like I say all the time: Pulling on a flower will not make it grow faster. What we need are positive incentives based on good old common sense. That is exactly what this bill has. It is also important from a taxation perspective, because we want to let people and companies hold on to more of their money so that they can invest in much more economical and environmentally friendly approaches. We also have to find ways to use the energy that is currently going to waste. This bill will incentivize entrepreneurs to find new, much smarter ways to harness the energy that their business is generating. Essentially, here is what this bill proposes. Businesses generate a tremendous amount of heat as a result of the operations taking place in their facilities, but this heat is wasted. Up to 30% of this waste heat could be used efficiently and intelligently. That is smart because it is nothing new. The energy is already there. It is simply a matter of capturing it, storing it and using it in a meaningful way. When I was preparing the speech I am delivering today, I learned that this involves generating electricity from waste heat. I will not hide the fact that when I saw “waste heat”, I found it somewhat odd, bordering on the absurd, or even a little suspicious. As a result, I would rather talk about recovery, because waste heat is heat that escapes and is lost into the atmosphere, whereas it could be used through recovery. This brings to mind a fundamental principle in economics and ecology, namely that the best energy is the energy we do not consume, or rather, the energy we use because it already exists. That is precisely the objective of this bill. Some will say that the member for Calgary Centre did not invent the principle behind this bill. Of course not. For decades now, if not longer, some companies have been harnessing, capturing, storing and making smart use of the heat generated by their operations. The difference is that there is no incentive for that in the federal plan. We believe that this approach, using or recovering waste heat, should be treated the same as solar and wind energy. It is just common sense. Wind energy has potential, but it is not the answer to everything. Solar energy also has potential, but it is not the answer to everything, either. These come with both challenges and benefits. The same is true of heat recovery. This approach is pragmatic, effective, environmentally friendly and economical. In short, it is a conservative approach. That is why I urge everyone, including my colleagues in the House, to support this bill, because it addresses precisely what brings us all together. Above all, it is meant to be efficient and cost-effective for everyone. In fact, this could affect nearly every industry sector. I am going to have to put on my glasses, because there are so many that I have no choice but to read them. We are talking specifically about heavy industry material handling, cement plants, glass manufacturing, chemicals, paper and forestry, as well as mining, energy, and utilities. In short, it affects just about every sector of the manufacturing industry. Thousands of companies would be able to recover this heat through a tax incentive, and that is what the bill proposes. We are talking about tax incentives. I have to say I am a car enthusiast. People in the automotive industry say it: the greenest cars, aside from100% electric vehicles, of course, are used cars. I say this to make people fully aware and understand that manufacturing a car, whether electric or traditional, has a significant environmental cost, not to mention an environmental impact. Someone who buys a 100% electric used car creates double the benefit, in other words, the environmental impact is lower because it is a used car, and using an electric car certainly produces fewer emissions. It is a win-win situation. We made an announcement over the weekend. Our leader was there, as was our colleague from Ontario, who earlier announced the private member's bill to eliminate the GST on used cars. A vehicle that has already been manufactured and taxed should not be taxed a second, third or fourth time because people want to buy that used vehicle. The GST has already been paid once. It does not need to be paid repeatedly, especially since, from an environmental standpoint, it is always better to buy a used car than a brand new car. All environmentalists say so. This is an environmentally friendly Conservative measure. Yes, we Conservatives are environmentalists because we are taking a pragmatic approach. We are prioritizing people's pocketbooks. A consumer who buys a used car may not necessarily have the means to buy a new one. However, this measure benefits both the consumer buying the car and the environment because a used car is much greener than a brand new one. Any environmentalist will tell us that. They may not say that this is a Conservative approach, but it is. I am saying it. This bill is a step in the right direction. It takes a pragmatic approach. It is meant to put more money in people's pockets and give businesses more funds to reinvest in their operations in order to make them greener, more efficient and more profitable, while ensuring strong environmental protection and sound economic stewardship when it comes to energy management. As I mentioned earlier, this is nothing new. Incentives are already in place in France, and the results are quite promising. As stated in a press release from CEA Liten, “Lower process water consumption (either direct for steam or indirect, such as for wet cooling towers) is an added benefit.” This makes it a win-win situation. Even though there are tax incentives elsewhere and there may be some here in Canada, we believe that this approach, which involves reusing the heat generated by industrial equipment and factory machinery and equipment as an energy source, is feasible. The technology allows for it and it is constantly improving. However, the government still needs to view it as a green approach, just as it does with wind turbines and solar energy. That is why I urge the Liberals to support this bill. If, for some reason, they have any doubts, they should recall that three years ago I introduced Bill C-375. The idea behind that bill was one project, one review. It was common sense. People voted against it, but guess what? A year ago, in the Speech from the Throne, the King acknowledged that it was a good thing. He himself said that the government would implement a law ensuring that there is a single environmental assessment for each project. If the Liberals are recycling my idea for Bill C-375, I invite them to do so immediately for the bill—

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Act

2026-06-12

“I want to cheer for my home team too. Residential schools were very bad. That was good we said sorry. But I want our people to be rich. Tell everyone why 'partner in prosperity' will make them rich.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it has been a real pleasure to hear the speech of my colleague, and I deeply appreciate his work for first nations. As everybody know, I am very proud to be a member of the House, because I represent Wendake, in my riding, and I am very proud to have been the representative of its people for the last 18 years here in the House of Commons and before that in the national assembly. Let me remind members that many years ago, on June 11, 2008, Prime Minister Harper apologized for the crimes that had been done at the residential schools, but a lot of things have not been done yet, especially one of the key elements in our policy when we talk about the first nations as partners in prosperity. Could the member explain to Canadians what we mean when we are using the words “partners in prosperity” with respect to first nations?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-12

“The economy is bad under the new Prime Minister. Inflation is high. Many Canadians need food banks. The Prime Minister promised lower grocery prices, but spends lots of money on his own food. I want him to think about that.”

“I want to blame the Prime Minister personally for the recession. His leadership is bad. I want him to magically fix the cost of living.”

Government Orders

2026-06-11

“I want everyone to see me praising my colleague. I want to use this praise to ask about her party's experience over the past year. I want to bring up past controversies.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her speech, which was clearly very well researched. I also want to congratulate her, not only on her new role, although she has been in that role for a while, but also on a wonderful year, both personally and professionally. In fact, all our colleagues I talk to about are very happy for her. Everyone is pleased with the work done by my colleague. Speaking of election laws, as parliamentarians we are in an extraordinary conflict of interest, since that is our job. That is our job and the reality we face. Our organizations, meaning political parties, are directly affected by the rules we adopt. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on her party's experience over the past year. This is a unique situation, not unlike the well-known 50%-plus-one debate, where a single vote made a difference and the courts were called upon to rule on it. Can my colleague share the lessons we, as a society, were able to learn from this event?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Indigenous Affairs

2026-06-11

“I want to blame the government. I think they spend too much money on the wrong things. Taxpayers must spend less money!”

Statements by Members

The Economy

2026-06-09

“Canada is in a recession. The Liberals won't admit it. Canadians have it rough. They need food banks. Houses cost too much. Businesses invest less. Banks say growth is bad. The Prime Minister had three bad quarters. Canada is in a recession. When will things get better?”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the sad reality is that Canada is in a recession. While the Liberals refuse to acknowledge this and continue to play with words, Canadians are facing very real hardships. A total of 2.2 million Canadians, a third of whom are children, rely on food banks. Canada has the worst food inflation in the G7. Housing is no longer affordable, and young people are giving up on the dream of home ownership. The overall economy is not doing any better. Productivity is tanking, businesses are investing less, and this marks the fifth negative quarter. The Parliamentary Budget Officer says that the labour market has weakened and that businesses are postponing their investment plans because of increased uncertainty. Banks are forecasting dismal growth of 0.8% according to Scotiabank and 0.5% according to BMO. That is the reality for all Canadians. Since the Prime Minister took office, we have had three negative quarters. Unfortunately, yes, Canada is in a recession. When will we see real results for all Canadians?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Main Estimates, 2026-27

2026-06-08

“You talk a lot but say nothing. I'm focused on one real thing: $200 million spent on an empty field. Do you really think our priority should be a space race? Or should we be thorough? Is the industry's future worth sending that money far away from where people already are?”

“I want $200 million more for Canada's aerospace industry. Why won't this government spend it? That money should go to Quebec.”

“Here's what I got from that: the member from Lac-Saint-Jean is ineffective and his riding is very important. Also, Bagotville military base is important.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague said he is lucky to represent the people of his riding, Lac-Saint-Jean. I would like to gently correct him. As far as I know, he did not win the lottery to get here. He has duly earned the respect and support of his constituents. My colleague highlighted how ineffective this government has been over the last 11 years, but looking forward, I was excited about the proposal he brought forward. It is great to hear a Bloc Québécois MP from Lac-Saint-Jean speak so enthusiastically about the future of Canada's north. I find that very interesting. He also talked about the federal government's impact on his region. I do not want to start a war between Lac-Saint-Jean and Saguenay, but could my colleague talk about the importance of the Bagotville military base, which Canada established during the Second World War precisely to protect the aluminum industry that made it possible to build the aircraft that would liberate the world from Nazism?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The previous prime minister made a bad decision to change the train project. The government is taking farmers' land in Mirabel and doing it very badly. I want you to say how bad it is for farmers when the government takes their land.”

Government Orders

Build Canada Homes Act

2026-06-05

“I want to cheer on Quebec taking full control over its affairs. I hope that jurisdictions will be respected. I think that when the Constitution is followed, things go well.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I was unable to hear my colleague's entire speech, but he said certain things that deserve to be acknowledged. First, he spoke about Daniel Johnson, leader of the Union Nationale and premier of Quebec from 1966 to 1968, who passed away on the day the magnificent Manic‑5 generating station was due to be inaugurated. I would like to point out that today marks exactly 60 years since Mr. Johnson was elected. Some will recall that this 1966 election was particularly notable because there was an incredible discrepancy between the percentage of votes and the percentage of MNAs elected. There was the famous question posed by Pierre Nadeau to Daniel Johnson on election night. Mr. Nadeau asked him whether he was aware that Premier Lesage did not recognize the victory. Mr. Johnson replied that, although Jean Lesage might not recognize the victory, he himself recognized that he had won. My colleague also spoke of the Constitution. I agree with his remarks. The Constitution must be respected. The Constitution quite clearly defines federal and provincial jurisdictions. When it is followed, things go well. To support this claim, I would remind the House that, during the 1981 constitutional debate, Conservative Party leader Mr. Clark allowed the provinces to join the debate. Speaking of Mr. Clark, I want to mention that today is his 87th birthday. Does my colleague know that, although Quebec never signed the Constitution, which is extremely unfortunate for all of Quebec, it nevertheless managed to take full control over its affairs? I have to say that I would not have signed either. That said, let us hope that jurisdictions will be respected, which has not been the case over the past 11 years.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-05

“Why won't any minister admit Canada is the only G7 or G20 country in recession? The banks are predicting the worst growth in the G7. The government won't admit it. They should stop hiding it.”

“I want to agree that jobs are good. But I also want to shift the topic back to bad economic news. I especially want to focus on rising youth unemployment, and how unlikely it is this government will reduce the deficit. Is the government really unable to admit that Canada is the only G7 country in recession right now?”