Gérard Deltell · TranslatePolitics.ca

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-05

“Canada is in a recession. High house prices hurt young people. The other party should admit it.”

Government Orders

Protecting Victims Act

2026-06-04

“I don't like that the government limited debate on this bill. We all want to protect victims and punish criminals, especially for sex crimes. When the government shuts down debate, democracy loses.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, unfortunately, I do not at all appreciate the government's decision to invoke closure on this debate. Nobody wins when the government limits debate on a bill, especially one that deals directly with justice. When it comes to the basic principles of this bill, we all agree that we need to ensure greater protection and get tougher on crime. As always, the devil is in the details. That is particularly true when it comes to justice and crime. We are all in favour of tougher laws. We all agree that we need to better protect victims and that we need to crack down on criminals, especially in cases involving sex crimes or other related offences. Does the minister agree that, unfortunately, democracy as a whole loses when the government shuts down debate on such a sensitive subject?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-06-02

“I appreciate my friend's work. But the Liberals made big promises. The Prime Minister said he knew how to fix things. He hasn't delivered.”

“Thank you for standing up for businesses in your riding. I think the government should help businesses by finding markets and reducing taxes. Giving out subsidies won't help. The government should help businesses have more money to invest in the future.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for standing up for the businesses in his riding and in his part of the country. He does a good job of representing those people, unlike what we have seen over the past 10 years. I want to point out that we think that all natural resources should be developed properly. The best way for the government to help businesses is to find markets for them, support them in their search for new markets and reduce the related tax burden. Giving out hundreds of thousands of dollars and subsidies is not going to help. Instead, the government needs to help businesses develop markets and ensure that they have more money in their coffers so that they can invest in the future with the help and support of governments. The government needs to give them more room to act by opening up markets. Canada has representatives around the world, so lumber from the Gaspé region could be sold around the world.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The Liberals aren't getting results. Their leader looks weak and says embarrassing things. People need real results.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the comments by my colleague from Winnipeg North, even if they are wrong. The problem is, where are the results? People are asking for real results. I am sure the member remembers well the campaign promise by the leader of the Liberal Party 15 months ago. He said it would be elbows up and he told America we would be strong again. When he got elected, he went to the White House. What did he do? It was far from elbows up. He was humble. What did he do a week ago? He went to New York. What did he say? He said we will make America great again. Who can believe it? This is the truth. This is the reality. Imagine if a Conservative had said that in New York. Those guys would have been in a nuclear war against us. The truth is that this country needs real effects and real results—

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“Canada is in a recession. The economy is weak and people are struggling. The government spent too much money and now we have a lot of debt. We need to cut taxes and help Canadians keep more of their own money. The government should also support Canada's natural resources and free trade.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in today's debate on Canada's economic future, particularly with regard to the reality facing all Canadians as we speak, because yes, sadly, Canada is in a recession. It is with great joy and pleasure that I will share my time with my distinguished colleague from Calgary Crowfoot, and I thank all those who are vigilant, unlike myself, who have unfortunately dropped the ball. In that regard, I will have a few words to say about people who have dropped the ball. We are not happy to note that Canada is in a recession. As all economists know, a country is in a recession when its gross domestic product, or GDP, is negative for two consecutive quarters. Some may seek to qualify this particular recession, but, mathematically speaking and quite clearly, it is defined as follows: If the GDP is down for two consecutive quarters, it is a recession, and that is what we are dealing with. Some have tried to quibble over this definition of a recession. However, beyond the quibbling, there is the reality of the hardships faced by Canadians—hardships that have plagued Canada for far too long. We have the worst food inflation among G7 countries. Every month, 2.2 million Canadians turn to food banks for food. Let us not forget that we are in Canada. Of that number, one-third are children. Families, fathers and mothers, cannot afford to provide for themselves and must resort to visiting food banks. I want to mention some folks in my riding, including people at Amélie et Frédérick and community fridges in Val‑Bélair, L'Ancienne‑Lorette and Loretteville on Racine. These people are working hard to provide food aid, and God knows their work is essential. We are fortunate that these volunteers with various charities in every riding, especially my riding, Louis‑Saint‑Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, are thinking of the least fortunate. The thing is, these folks are telling me that the people who donated to food banks for years are now the ones coming to food banks so they can feed their families properly. Unfortunately, Canada also has the second-highest unemployment rate among G7 countries. That is the reality in Canada. Those are the problems Canadians are facing. This confirms the sad reality that Canada is in a recession: those 112,000 jobs that were lost since the beginning of the year. There is the reality faced by entrepreneurs who want to invest but are dealing with serious concerns about economic stability. They cannot invest in an environment that is not stable, and the Canadian economy is currently losing momentum. We can also see the impact in trade flows. Some $20 billion in investment has left Canada, on top of the $1 trillion in investment that has not been made in Canada over the past 10 years under Justin Trudeau and the current Prime Minister. That is why we feel that the Canadian economy is weakening, that it is declining and that it is in recession. It is also important to understand that, over the last 10 years, Liberal governance has, unfortunately, not changed much. Take a look at what happened between 2015 and 2025, and from 2025 until today. Unfortunately, we are still on the same track. The government spends without restraint, it shows no concern for properly managing the money of Canadians who pay GST every day and their taxes every month, when our primary responsibility, as parliamentarians, is to ensure that the money is spent wisely. We have been living beyond our means for nearly 11 years. The debt has risen by $1 trillion, which is almost twice the total debt accumulated over the previous 125 years. That is the reality of Liberal management: $1 trillion in additional debt. Last week, I had an exchange with the Minister of Finance during committee of the whole. I reminded him that he is the third-most senior minister in the government, since the Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, Intergovernmental Affairs and One Canadian Economy and the Minister of Industry were both appointed ministers as soon as Mr. Trudeau was elected. Six months later, the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, the current Minister of Finance, was appointed. Today, as Minister of Finance, he is responsible for debts totalling $1 trillion, because that $1 trillion in debt has accumulated over the past 10 years. That is money we do not have. That is money that had to be printed. That is debt we are passing on to our children, our grandchildren, and our great-grandchildren, who have not yet been born but who will have to pay for it. That is why we must be careful. That is why we need a positive, winning strategy for Canadians. Our Conservative approach is basically to leave more money in the pockets of Canadians. Two months ago, we started a debate about transportation and gas taxes. That affects all Canadians, not just those who have a gas-powered car. We know that the goods we buy, like food, do not fall from the sky. These goods are transported, and, in many cases, gas is involved. This gas tax affects all Canadians. Our proposal was very clear: Abolish all federal taxes for the entire year. That would leave $5 billion more in the pockets of Canadians. We believe that people are better at managing their money than the government, to whom they send their money in the form of taxes. The government used our idea to fuel theirs, no pun intended. They decided to temporarily cut the excise tax by 10¢ for a few months. To paraphrase Neil Armstrong's words in reverse, cutting the tax may be a giant leap for the Liberals, but it is a small step for taxpayers. That is why we need to go much further. Our approach is to abolish all federal taxes. That would leave $5 billion more in the pockets of Canadians. That is how we can help people. We also wanted to unlock the full potential of Canada's natural resources. I have had plenty of opportunities to discuss this in my time here and on prior occasions when I was in the National Assembly. I am an ardent fan and strongly in favour of all the natural resources we have and all energy sources. When I talk about energy, I mean green energy, renewable energy and so-called fossil fuels. Canada has it all. Canada has every energy source that countries would go to war over. Canada has all the natural resources it needs to achieve its own and the planet's full potential. Canada is ready to go. Unfortunately, the government spent a decade holding back the development that Canada needs, that Canadians need and that the whole world needs. The whole world needs more energy. It needs the natural resources and rare materials that Canada has. The way I see it, there is no such thing as going too far with any of this. Furthermore, we must continue to open the door to free trade with countries around the world. As I mentioned a few moments ago, that has been the case in Canada since Brian Mulroney's terms in office, since the 1988 free trade agreement and since Jean Chrétien's efforts to extend that North American agreement. I am also proud to add that, under Stephen Harper, we truly broke down barriers by concluding agreements with nearly 40 countries, and that is a good thing. I am very pleased to see that the current government is following in those footsteps. We must continue in this direction, while recognizing that Canada is a champion of free trade. If free trade creates real wealth for Canadians, then it should go hand in hand with lower taxes and lower taxation. If we are capable of that, if we are a global model for free trade, then we should also practise free trade within our own country. I therefore urge the government to go further. That is why, unfortunately, Canada is in a recession. Canada deserves better.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“You mentioned the Harper government. It did a good thing with free trade. Free trade is good. My party did good things. We should do more of that.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned a situation earlier and wondered whether it was the Harper government that established free trade with South Korea. The answer is a categorical yes. Members may recall that, under the visionary leadership of Ed Fast, the then minister of international trade, Canada, under Mr. Harper, had free trade agreements with 40 or so nations. Plus, back in 1988, when free trade with the United States was being debated, we received the support of Quebeckers, especially prominent Quebeckers like Bernard Landry and Jacques Parizeau, who spoke out in favour of free trade. I would appreciate it if the member could explain why free trade is important for Canada and especially for Quebec.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-01

“You say everything is fine. I say Canadians are struggling. People are losing jobs. People are using food banks. Canada's economy is bad. Other countries are doing better.”

“Canada's Liberal government put us in a recession. Other countries did better. The Prime Minister failed to keep Canada's economy strong.”

Oral Questions

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2

2026-05-29

“I want to stall this debate by trying to introduce off-topic documents.”

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-05-29

“You're wrong. Statistics Canada says we're the only G7 country in a recession. All the G7 countries face the same problems, but Canada's doing the worst. How can you stand there and say the opposite of the truth? Canadians are tired of these lies.”

“I say the other party is bad because the economy is bad and people are having trouble affording food. I want you to think about the Prime Minister spending a lot of money on food for himself.”

Government Orders

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2

2026-05-29

“You say the economy is wonderful. But Canada is the only G7 country in recession. I want you to explain that.”

Private Members' Business

Canada Revenue Agency Act

2026-05-28

“I support this bill. It's a no-brainer. The CRA needs to crack down on white-collar criminals and companies that don't pay their taxes. We need to know the tax gap and flush out the scoundrels using tax havens. Canada should be like other countries that have recovered millions from tax cheats. It's not fair that hard-working Canadians pay their taxes while others evade them. The CRA has been mismanaged under the Liberals and needs to do its job. I want this bill to pass.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in this debate on Bill S‑217. I am very pleased to see that the Bloc Québécois and the governing party are in agreement on this bill. Of course, we are the ones introducing it through the member for Simcoe North. This is not the first time that Bill S-217, an act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act with regard to reporting on unpaid income tax, has been before this House. Essentially, the purpose of this bill is to put more pressure on the CRA to track down the scoundrels who do not pay their taxes, especially those known as “white-collar criminals”, in other words, individuals or companies who refuse to pay taxes or who use loopholes and cook the books to avoid paying their taxes. We need to get to the bottom of things, and this bill does just that. Some may be surprised that this is the third time this bill has been introduced and debated in the House, even though it is a no-brainer. As my Bloc Québécois colleague said earlier, the first time was under a majority government; the Liberals rejected it. That is part of public debate. There was then a sequence of three elections with minority governments. That meant there was not enough time to do the work properly. As a parliamentarian, I find that unfortunate, but let us remember that, from December 2024 to mid-December 2024 and then to mid-September 2025, over a nine-month period, the House sat for only five weeks. This was because of the change in government, the new Prime Minister's government, the elections and the summer recess. All of this prevented us from doing our parliamentary work. Now, we are doing it, and we are going to do it right. I will put on my glasses. I am going to do so often, because this whole subject is so technical that we need to get our facts straight. This bill has three objectives: to compile a list of all convictions for tax evasion, including international tax evasion; to require the CRA to include statistics on the tax gap in its annual reports every three years; and to require the minister to provide the Parliamentary Budget Officer with data on the tax gap. These three elements gripped the entire world when the Panama Papers scandal came to light. I am sure everyone remembers about ten years ago, when a consortium of investigative journalists unearthed what came to be known as the “Panama Papers”. They had unravelled a web of tax havens. The documents confirmed that several countries, including Canada, were indeed home to the scoundrels I mentioned earlier, whether companies or individuals. In total, 900 of them had flouted every possible law, and then some, to evade taxes. Some countries have taken the bull by the horns and achieved concrete results. In Australia, $44 million was recovered, compared with $87 million in Germany, $175 million in Spain and $25 million in Iceland. Canada, for its part, has recovered nothing. That is pretty weak. That is precisely why this bill must be passed. The CRA and anyone who cares about ensuring that everyone pays their fair share must be treated fairly. Being treated fairly means having to pay, and if a company does not pay, it should be seen as a bad guy who does not pay taxes. That is why it is important to do the right thing. It is also important to note that there are key points in each of the three stages. For example, earlier we talked about the shortfall. I will not deny that certain phrases sometimes sound better in French than in English. One thing, however, can be expressed equally in both languages. I was talking earlier about the minority government, which has since become a majority government because of the floor crossers. The term “floor crossers” is funny, is it not? I think “floor crossers” sounds just as good in French, for that it what they are. Getting back to the shortfall, some countries have handled that well, namely the United States, Great Britain, Turkey and Sweden. It is time for Canada to do the right thing so that everyone who is supposed to pay can do so properly. That is why it is essential that this bill pass. Allow me to recognize the perseverance of Senator Percy Downe who, for years, did the necessary work to push for this critical cause. It is thanks to him that we can debate it today. I also want to thank my colleague from Simcoe North for this. I want to note that my colleague served, in a different era, in better times for Canada, in Prime Minister Harper's government, in various ministers' offices, and he distinguished himself in a most inspiring way. I would like to think that, in a few years, three years at most, Canadians will honour us with their trust and the member for Simcoe North would do a great service to the Canadian government in cabinet. I am saying that he would make a good minister. Let us get back to the matter at hand. Yes, the Canada Revenue Agency absolutely must do its job. It is clear that these are not great times for the CRA. Just a few months ago, the Auditor General tabled a scathing report about poor management at the CRA. The report notes that there was a complete lack of leadership, with terrible results for all Canadians. Why would I say that? One reason is that people were waiting for ages when they called for information. Worse still, when information was provided, it was not always correct. Just imagine: People who cannot afford to pay a tax expert or an accountant to prepare their tax return for them pick up the phone, call CRA, talk to someone and get the wrong information one in five times. A few months later, CRA writes to let them know they made a mistake and owe $150, which they have to pay back right away because interest charges will keep adding up. That is what happened after 10 years of Liberal leadership at the Canada Revenue Agency. I would like to reiterate what the member for Simcoe North said to my government colleague earlier. He said that CRA employees should not be blamed for not being properly trained. Nor should the CRA itself be blamed for being badly mismanaged in recent years. Let us not forget that Prime Minister Trudeau put someone in charge for seven years who did not necessarily have sufficient experience in this field to provide strong leadership. I would like to commend and thank the current Prime Minister for firing this person from cabinet. I would also like to commend and thank the people of the Gaspé region for firing her from the House of Commons. Obviously, we would have preferred to see our candidate, Jean‑Pierre Pigeon, elected in that riding. The people decided otherwise. That said, I have absolutely nothing against the current member from the Gaspé region, a former fellow journalist who truly stands out, and that is a good thing for Canadian democracy. This bill needs to move forward. We need to move forward to keep Canada in the loop when it comes to targeting and tracking down white collar criminals who do not pay their full taxes. We need to flush out these characters who, unfortunately, do not have the honour and dignity of paying what they owe and who invest tens of thousands, if not millions, of dollars to avoid paying what they owe the Canadian government. Canada needs this legislation to flush out criminals, be more transparent and get access to all the necessary information. That is why we obviously hope that the entire House will vote in favour of this bill.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Foreign Investment

2026-05-28

“I want to make the Liberals look bad. I say the Prime Minister moved a company to New York. I say that proves he is bad at getting investment. I demand the Liberals fix this.”

“The Prime Minister invests outside Canada. He should make Canada a better place to invest.”

“The Prime Minister is away networking instead of working.”

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-05-28

“I respect that my colleague had his say in Parliament. I want to know if he knows the member he cheered for voted to remove the exact tax he wants put back. That minister also supported one kind of oil project review. And he voted to let the government make deals with Alberta. The tributes are nice but I don't get why my colleague is cheering for a guy who took so many positions he disagrees with.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech and for his point of view, which was very well defined, but which we obviously have reservations about. Still, we respect what is known as parliamentary democracy. At the end of his remarks, the member paid tribute to the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie. I can understand that, now that he seems to be neutral, the Bloc Québécois is congratulating him. Is the member aware that when the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie was a senior minister in this government, he voted for abolishing the carbon tax, for the throne speech that meant environmental projects would now have a single assessment and for Bill C‑5, which enables the government to enter into agreements with Alberta, among others? More importantly, is my colleague aware that the member for Laurier—Sainte‑Marie was the Minister of Canadian Heritage when this government abolished the digital services tax? We, the Conservatives, saw no problem with that, but why pay tribute to a guy who was a senior minister for Canadian heritage and the environment, who held positions that differed from those of the Bloc Québécois?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-05-26

“I want the audience to know their GST is paying interest on the debt. I want to pressure the Liberals to commit money to my local tramway project.”

“He promised a $31 billion deficit, now it's $68 billion. Canadians need more than tiny tax cuts! I want them to follow my big plan.”