Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault

In response to a question from Alexis Deschênes

“I want this bill to include the noose as a hate symbol. We must call out people who downplay how much these symbols hurt targeted groups.”

“Mr. Speaker, I was also in the House yesterday at that late hour. I actually do think that condemning it is entirely legitimate. We cannot remain silent when people make comments that minimize the repercussions that certain symbols can have on targeted communities. I was not planning on speaking to Bill C-9 today, but after listening to my colleague, I wrote my speech this morning to call out those kinds of remarks. I also wanted to point out that witnesses appearing before the Senate explained why the noose should be included as a hate symbol in the bill. Minimizing these repercussions within the Parliament of Canada could have an impact on people listening to us. I found that—”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I want the House to pass this bill and include the noose on the list of banned hate symbols. The noose is a tool of racial terror against Black people. This bill will make it a crime to display hate symbols in public, and it will protect people from being blocked or threatened at their places of worship.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time. In Canada, no one should feel unsafe because of who they are, their religious practices, or where they gather. However, recently we have seen an increase in hate crimes. As members of Parliament, we cannot stand idly by. We must take action. Bill C-9 introduces a targeted set of reforms to the Criminal Code to protect safe access to community spaces, address hate crimes and clarify the legal definition of hate. Bill C-9 also expands the existing offence of wilful promotion of hatred by recognizing a modern expression of hate: the public display of hateful or terrorist symbols. We thereby recognize that when a person displays certain symbols with the intent to deliberately promote hatred, this constitutes a separate offence. Today, we are focusing specifically on the proposed Senate amendment to add the noose to the list of symbols of hate. The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights has heard from numerous witnesses and organizations who have stated that the noose is a recognized symbol of terror and intimidation against Black people and that it should be treated in the same manner under the new offence relating to hate symbols. I sincerely believe that when people targeted by these symbols courageously come forward to testify before a parliamentary committee, whether in the House of Commons or the Senate, to explain how a symbol is perceived as an instrument of violence, threat, and hatred directed at them, we have a duty to listen to them. The noose is closely associated with the history of racial lynchings that have left their mark on North America. It has been used to terrorize, humiliate and control Black communities for generations by making them feel that they were neither safe in their own communities nor fully accepted within society. Its use against Black people is a form of racial intimidation and a symbol associated with violence and white supremacy. There is nothing ambiguous about it. Displaying it in a workplace, in an educational institution, at a demonstration or elsewhere in the public sphere goes beyond the bounds of legitimate expression. When it is used to target or intimidate Black people, it then symbolizes real acts of persecution, violence and hatred. As a Canadian citizen, I believe that we should all be concerned when such symbols are used to promote hatred against colleagues, friends or members of our communities. Combatting hate is not just an issue for those who are directly affected by it. It is a responsibility shared by society as a whole. Even when we are not personally targeted by hate symbols, we cannot remain silent. As members of Canadian society, we have a duty to strongly condemn behaviours that seek to intimidate, exclude or terrorize some of our fellow Canadians. This goes to the very nature of living together in harmony. Especially when members of our communities are being targeted, being there for one another is what defines us as Canadians. Our diversity is a strength, but it can only thrive in a climate of respect, dignity and security. Last night, I was appalled by the tone of the remarks made by certain Conservative colleagues, in particular those of the member for York—Durham. He downplayed the impact of the use of the noose in Canada, going so far as to say that it was odd to include it in the bill as a symbol of hate. I feel my colleague’s remarks are inappropriate and deeply out of place. The MP’s comments unfortunately demonstrate a lack of consideration for the experiences of many members of the Black community. Questioning the need to recognize the noose as a hate symbol is akin to downplaying the suffering, fear and trauma that this symbol evokes for those who have historically been targeted by racial violence. These remarks also show disregard for the testimony of many individuals and organizations who have come before parliamentarians to explain the historical and contemporary significance of this symbol. In this context, downplaying its significance sends a worrying message. It gives the impression that the concerns being expressed by the Black community are not being taken seriously. As parliamentarians, we have a responsibility to listen, understand and acknowledge the realities experienced by communities affected by racism in order to build a fairer and more inclusive society. Brushing aside their concerns, as my colleague did last night, or questioning the legitimacy of their experiences does nothing to help build a more inclusive society. On the contrary, it risks trivializing behaviours that have no place in a democracy that respects the dignity of every individual. These comments from the Conservative member are all the more concerning because they ignore the reality experienced by many Black Canadians. Hate crime data that is reported by police shows that Black people remain among the most frequently targeted groups for hate crimes based on race or ethnicity. Behind these statistics are individuals, families and communities that experience the real consequences of racism and intimidation. In this context, it is difficult to understand why some people would choose to downplay the impact of a symbol that is widely recognized as a historical instrument of racial violence. Instead, we should be listening to affected communities and being serious about measures to protect them better. As legislators, we have a responsibility to act seriously, with sensitivity and respect, toward people who are the target of hate crimes. I sincerely hope that my colleague from York—Durham will retract his statement and reconsider what he said last night, because it was completely unacceptable. His statement has no place in the House or in society. In Canada, there is no place for hatred or intimidation based on race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation. We have a collective duty to build a country in which everyone can live, work, learn and practise their religion safely and without fear of being targeted or intimidated. That is why I support the Senate amendment to recognize the noose as a symbol of hate. Adopting the amendment sends a clear message. We have heard the affected communities, we acknowledge their experiences and we refuse to turn a blind eye to hatred. This is how we strengthen our shared way of life and the truly Canadian values of respect, equality and dignity. I will use the last few minutes of my time to say that I am disappointed by the excessive partisanship we have seen in the debate on Bill C‑9. In a debate as serious as this one, a debate about fighting hatred, about the lived experiences of people in our communities, we should be able to set partisanship aside and truly reflect on how to make our communities safer for everyone. We must rise to the occasion. Canadians expect us to elevate the level of debate, to rise above partisan games. Unfortunately, that is not what we have seen from the Conservative side. I urge my colleagues to exercise caution and rigour in the tone and content of their remarks, particularly when it comes to issues as sensitive as combatting hate. Sensationalist slogans and simplistic statements designed to stir up people on social media have no place in such a serious debate. We are here to legislate responsibly, not to polarize public discourse. As lawmakers, we also have a duty to maintain a healthy social climate and to consider the consequences our words may have in the public sphere. Unfortunately, during the debate on Bill C‑9, we also saw a major disinformation campaign circulating, particularly on social media. This campaign was fuelled in part by the remarks made by Conservative members of Parliament. As my colleague mentioned earlier, certain aspects of Bill C‑9 have been completely distorted from reality and have even been used in the Conservative Party’s political fundraising activities. I do not believe this is commensurate with the issues before us, and I find it deplorable. Lastly, beyond the issue of hate symbols, Bill C‑9 is an important step forward in a number of ways. For one thing, it includes a new obstruction offence that prohibits obstructing or interfering with lawful access to a building or structure used primarily for religious worship or by an identifiable group. This is indeed a problem. People must be able to enter the place they use for religious worship or gatherings in complete safety. This is fundamental. The bill also proposes a new intimidation offence that would prohibit behaviour meant to intimidate, threaten or frighten persons trying to access a building used primarily by an identifiable group or for religious worship. These measures will make our communities safer for everyone. I am calling on all of my colleagues to support Bill C‑9, now in the final stages of the legislative process, so that it can be implemented and address the very real concerns of our communities.”

In response to a question from Tamara Kronis

“We need to grow more food in Canada so we can feed ourselves. That is why our plan invests in local farmers and greenhouses.”

“Madam Speaker, I am glad we are talking about the issue of food, because it is important to strengthen Canada’s food sovereignty. In fact, last week, we laid the groundwork for our food security strategy. That means investing in our local farmers and providing support for greenhouses. We will also look at where the challenges are and how we can increase production in Canada. To ensure our food security, we want to see more Canadian food on our plates. That is what we want to do as part of the strategy we announced in the past few weeks.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 46 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“Our economic plan helps everyone. We are supporting families and seniors with their living costs. We are also funding space projects to improve cell phone coverage, protecting wild salmon, and investing in arts and culture.”

“Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, a riding with a name even longer than mine. Today, we are discussing our economic update, which is an important step in our plan to build a strong Canada. Over the next few minutes, I will explain what we mean by a strong Canada. When we talk about building a strong Canadian economy, we are talking about an economy that works for everyone. That is why we are continuing our investments in social programs that help people deal with the cost of living. I am thinking in particular of the Canada child benefit. This is a monthly tax-free payment that helps families provide for their children. Since its introduction in 2016, it has become a cornerstone of Canada’s social safety net. Each year, it keeps nearly 600,000 children above the poverty line. In my province, New Brunswick, more than 80,000 families receive nearly $640 million a year. This money goes directly into the pockets of New Brunswick families to help them provide for their children. In July of this year, monthly payments will increase again to account for inflation. This is a good example of what we mean when we talk about building a strong Canadian economy that works for everyone. When we talk about our plan to build a stronger Canada, we are also talking about investments in nation-building projects, in infrastructure and housing, and in the projects carried out on the ground by our community organizations. In particular, I want to highlight the importance of the New Horizons for Seniors program, which provides financial support for projects that have a positive impact on the lives of seniors in their communities. Every year, many projects get built, including in my riding. They provide a wide range of activities that have a positive impact on seniors and the facilities they use. These projects help combat social isolation, promote volunteering among seniors and strengthen the communities in which they operate. This year, the call for proposals is open. Projects can receive up to $50,000 in funding and interested organizations have until July 14 to submit their application. I would like to illustrate the importance of these investments with a few examples from my riding, because these are projects that genuinely improve the lives of the people I represent here. I am thinking in particular of the investments made in various seniors clubs in Saint‑François‑de‑Madawaska, where renovations were carried out on the community kitchen. I am also thinking of a whole range of activities and workshops offered in Kedgwick for seniors, as well as the purchase of equipment for outdoor activities in Saint‑Quentin and the renovations at the Campbellton seniors club. I am also thinking of other types of organizations, such as the Jodin Residences in Edmundston, where I was able to attend the opening of a community garden; the Acanthus Gallery in Grand Falls, which offers pottery classes; the multi-generational activities offered in Vallée‑des‑Rivières; or the improvement work for Les aventuriers de Charlo. This is a range of activities. The amounts are not always huge, but it is money well spent to improve the lives of seniors and of those within our communities. When talking about building Canada strong, we must also look at which sectors of the economy need to be strengthened and developed. This brings to mind the work that we are doing to establish Canada’s sovereign space launch capabilities. Right now, Canada is the only G7 country that has no sovereign space launch capabilities. To fix this situation, we recently introduced a Canadian space launch act that is going to make a huge difference by developing the framework needed to create Canada’s sovereign space launch capabilities. This comes on top of our investments in supporting the development of spaceports, including Maritime Launch Services in Nova Scotia. These investments are important. They equip us with sovereign capabilities to meet our defence needs, serve our strategic interests and more. They will also create major economic benefits and address the needs of a wide range of sectors, like the telecommunications sector. We know that the new, rapidly emerging satellite technologies have the potential to change the cellular connectivity landscape in our regions. I know something on that score as the representative for Madawaska—Restigouche. I hear about cellular connectivity problems from constituents all the time. When I travel from one end of the riding to another, from Saint-Basile in Madawaska to Sainte-Anne-de-Madawaska in Restigouche, or along Highway 17, to name just a few, I run into lots of dead zones with no cell coverage. This is both a safety issue and an economic one, and since it affects the appeal of our communities, it is a top priority for the people I represent. Certainly, as a member of Parliament, I am very interested in the potential of satellites that, with certain technologies, could substantially expand cellular coverage in our regions that are currently underserved. By building our own space launch capabilities and supporting the development of a spaceport, we are ensuring that Canada does not miss the boat and that we have the capacity to support this sector of the future. We know that things are evolving and that this technology is developing. We are therefore preparing and investing to get this telecommunications sector ready, especially since we recognize its great potential for cellular connectivity. That is one example. Building Canada strong also means protecting nature. Last spring, we launched “A Force of Nature: Canada’s Strategy to Protect Nature”, backed by a $3.8-billion investment, which will focus on measurable outcomes and actions that can be implemented by 2030. Our strategy is built on three pillars aimed at aligning nature conservation with economic growth. These three pillars are “Protecting Nature in Canada”, “Building Canada Well” and “Valuing Nature and Mobilizing Capital”. Among the various measures included in our strategy to better protect nature, I would like to talk about our five-year investment of $81.7 million as part of Canada’s national strategy to ensure the future of Atlantic salmon 2024-2036. This funding will make an essential contribution to stabilizing and restoring wild Atlantic salmon habitats. As we know, this species has been in decline since the 1980s, but the rate of decline has accelerated in recent years and is having a real impact on our communities. It is therefore important to invest in the conservation of this species, particularly to protect our natural ecosystems, but also because of its strong cultural and identity-related value. In my riding, Madawaska—Restigouche, salmon fishing is rooted in traditions that date back several generations, as well as in fishing knowledge and practices that have been passed down from one generation to the next. The decline in the wild salmon population also represents a loss of our living heritage in my riding. It is therefore at the heart of our identity and our culture. It also has significant economic consequences because hundreds of jobs depend on it in the fishing camps that practise salmon fishing, particularly along the Restigouche River. Most of these camps are located in my riding. This has significant economic benefits for our communities. In short, preserving wild Atlantic salmon and investing in our strategy to protect nature means simultaneously protecting nature, supporting our local economy and keeping our heritage alive. To build Canada strong, we must also maintain a strong arts and culture sector. I am very pleased that budget 2025 includes an investment of more than $750 million to support arts and culture. Supporting arts and culture not only strengthens our identity and culture, but also brings significant economic benefits to our communities. There is also a wide range of projects in our ridings, including festivals, that can be supported through this funding. Summer is just around the corner, and a wide range of activities take place during the summer months. Local artists are often featured at festivals in our communities. In fact, back home in Madawaska—Restigouche, we have a packed lineup of events. Dedicated volunteers care deeply about our communities and want us to enjoy a lively and dynamic summer season. To that end, the federal government is supporting art exhibits, including by local artists, through various Department of Canadian Heritage programs. These programs can also be used to support programming put on by our cultural organizations and arts centres. This represents a whole range of funding that recognizes the importance of the arts and culture sector in building Canada strong. I see that I am running out of time. I would be happy to answer any questions my colleagues may have.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “When we talk about building a one Canadian economy?”

  Said 3 times by 2 members since May 29.

  Every time it was said →

In response to a question from Arielle Kayabaga

“I want the House to pass this bill. It will protect our elections and help people keep trusting our democracy.”

“Mr. Speaker, maintaining trust in our democratic institutions is essential. We have a robust electoral system and framework in Canada, but to keep it strong, we need to adapt it to the challenges of our time. I believe that by working together in the House, we will be able to maintain trust in our democratic institutions and make the necessary changes. As we are seeing in other parts of the world, some democracies are facing challenges. There are instances of abuse and situations where the public is losing confidence in its democratic institutions, which has serious consequences. That is why I believe that in Canada, where trust remains high, we must continue to work to preserve it by strengthening our democratic institutions and passing Bill C-25.”

In response to a question from Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

“I support this bill. Canada already has strong rules so only citizens can donate to political parties. This bill will close the remaining ways foreign money can influence our elections.”

“Canada’s political financing system is among the strongest in the world. When we compare ourselves to other democracies, we see that there are already several mechanisms in place to ensure that funding actually comes from Canadian citizens. We will close off the various avenues that could allow for foreign influence. Contribution limits are already in place. Canadian citizens have to be the ones contributing to political parties. We have a rigorous framework. Bill C-25, which is based on various recommendations from experts, will allow us to make this framework even more rigorous in order to ensure the integrity of our elections.”

“I support this bill to protect our elections. It stops people from putting dozens of fake candidates on ballots to disrupt voting. It bans AI deepfakes that spread lies about candidates and voting rules. It also stops foreign money, cryptocurrency, and untraceable donations from being used in elections and party leadership races.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by telling you that I will be sharing my speaking time with the member for Ponoka—Didsbury In Canada, we are privileged to have a strong and internationally recognized electoral system. Canadian democracy is among the most stable and resilient in the world, and the Canada Elections Act is recognized for its robust safeguards, strict rules on political financing and high standards of transparency. In addition to this solid framework, the strength of our electoral system also lies in its ability to evolve. The rules that protect our elections must adapt to the realities of our time. Today, as we can see throughout the world, democracies face growing threats, whether through the malicious use of technology, foreign interference, disinformation or other attempts to undermine public confidence in democratic processes. To maintain Canadians’ confidence in the integrity of our elections, it is therefore essential to continue strengthening the mechanisms that protect our democratic process. Public trust is the very foundation of democratic stability, and we must strive to preserve and strengthen that confidence at all times. That is why Bill C-25 proposes several practical measures to address current challenges, including addressing the problem of excessively long ballots, banning deepfakes of election officials, further protecting the integrity of leadership and nomination races, enhancing measures to prevent foreign interference, strengthening the enforcement of the act and improving federal requirements for the protection of personal information by federal political parties. These amendments did not come out of nowhere. They are well reasoned and based on recommendations made by experts during the public inquiry into foreign interference in federal electoral processes and democratic institutions, as well as by the Chief Electoral Officer and the commissioner of Canada elections. Over the next several minutes, I am going to review some of the measures set out in this bill and try to explain why I think they are important and why we should support them. The bill contains measures that seek to prevent excessively long ballots. We will achieve that by allowing voters to sign only one candidate nomination form per riding and by requiring each candidate in a riding to have their own official agent. Why are we doing that? It is because, over the past few years, we have seen a group of activists disrupting elections. Dozens of candidates in one riding had the same official agent and their nomination forms were signed by the same people. In some cases, we ended up with dozens of nominations for people who had no real intention of participating in the democratic process and who were really only trying to disrupt the democratic process that we want to protect. Let me give a few examples. In the last election in Terrebonne, nearly 40 out of 48 candidates were people who had no real intention of campaigning. As a result, instead of a normal ballot, we ended up with a blank ballot. In Battle River—Crowfoot, 200 out of 214 candidates were not really serious ones. In LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, during a by-election two years ago, we ended up with 91 candidates and a ballot that was a metre long. This has real consequences because it makes it harder for some people to participate. When voters are given a blank ballot and there are people who struggle with literacy or have difficulty writing, it makes it harder for them to participate in this democratic process. It shows a lack of respect for these voters. It also shows a lack of consideration for well-intentioned candidates who want to represent their community. I believe these changes strike the right balance between preventing candidacies intended solely to disrupt the elections and ensuring that serious candidates are allowed to run. By serious candidates, I am referring not only to those representing the major political parties in the House, but also, of course, to independent candidates who are genuinely committed to their communities and wish to represent them, as well as candidates from smaller political parties. The rules will not prevent this type of candidacy, since people will only need to have a single agent and collect the required number of signatures. With these changes, I think we have struck a good balance that will prevent excessively long ballots while still allowing serious candidates to run in elections. The bill also provides for various safeguards, particularly against the malicious use of new technologies in elections. As we know, various technologies are emerging, including artificial intelligence, and it is becoming increasingly easy to impersonate people online. For example, with AI, people can create videos in which they pretend to be someone else. People can be made to say things that they never actually said. In the context of an election, that can be dangerous and highly problematic. Imagine a candidate in an election. Someone makes a video in which the candidate appears to say all sorts of nonsense, and then posts it on social media. People who see that video might decide not to vote for that candidate. Someone could also make a fake video to impersonate an election official. For example, someone could impersonate the Chief Electoral Officer and give false information about the location of the polling station, the date of the election or the instructions to follow in order to vote. That could undermine the democratic process. That is why we are going to ban deepfakes. We will also strengthen safeguards for the use of IT systems in elections. We will tighten the rules on hacking or tampering with IT systems and databases with the aim of disrupting an election. As has already been mentioned, the issues are changing, and technologies are evolving. It is important that our regulatory framework keep pace and reflect the times we are in. We will also put stricter rules in place regarding political financing. Canada has one of the strongest political financing systems in the world. Since we are always looking to improve, we are going to introduce certain new rules to strengthen the system, particularly with regard to preventing foreign interference. This is an issue that has garnered significant attention in recent years. There was a commission on the subject. We have also seen several democracies around the world face foreign interference issues. We therefore want to close all possible avenues for foreign financing that could interfere with our democratic processes in Canada. For example, we will prevent political parties from accepting anonymous or untraceable contributions. This includes, for example, contributions made using cryptocurrency, prepaid cards or other forms of prepaid payment. It is not possible to clearly identify who is behind these contributions. We want to prevent foreign agents from making contributions using cryptocurrency or other forms of unidentified payment, for example. We will also prevent third parties, organizations, businesses, unions, or citizens who are not candidates, from organizing regulated political or election-related activities, such as election advertising or partisan activities, and accepting untraceable contributions. That way, it will not be possible to circumvent the rules. For example, cryptocurrencies cannot be used to fund an organization that would then finance partisan activities. We are shutting down those avenues as well. We will explicitly prohibit foreign actors from funding regulated activities, such as partisan activities or election advertising, carried out through third parties in Canada. These contributions must come exclusively from Canadian citizens or permanent residents. In our democracy, there are other key moments besides general elections. One example is leadership races within political parties. These can have a major impact on our democracy. Consider the leadership races to elect the new leader of the official opposition or the next prime minister. These are events that have tangible consequences. Nomination contests also come to mind. When several candidates in a riding want to stand for the same party, a nomination contest is arranged. These processes are also watershed moments in our democratic system, and we are going to strengthen the rules to better protect them. In fact, a number of rules that already apply to general elections will now apply to leadership campaigns and nomination contests. I am referring to rules about preventing foreign influence. For example, third parties will not be able to accept foreign funds to arrange nomination race activities. Other rules relate to the prevention of intimidation, bribery and identity theft. All of these procedures, already in use for general elections, will also apply to leadership campaigns and nomination contests. Through these carefully crafted measures, all based on assessments and consultations, we will strengthen our democratic system which, as I mentioned at the beginning of my speech, is already very strong. I believe that these changes will help maintain Canadians’ trust in our democratic institutions. Accomplishing this work is essential. I think most of my colleagues in the House share that opinion, and I look forward to seeing Bill C-25 receive royal assent.”

In response to a question from Warren Steinley

“Our plan to build the economy is working. We made over 20 new world partnerships, brought foreign investment to Canada, and have the second-fastest growing economy in the G7.”

“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister works every day to implement our plan to build the Canadian economy. One need only look at the results; they speak for themselves. More than twenty new partnerships have been launched around the world. We have attracted foreign investment to Canada. We have the second-strongest economic growth among G7 countries—”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Serge Cormier

“Our federal money helped pay for a local public transit service for rural areas. It is affordable and helps seniors, workers, and students get around. The service has been a big success, and more people are using it than expected.”

“Mr. Speaker, our federal funding covered a substantial portion of the capital costs of providing a public transit service that is truly tailored to rural regional realities. FlexGo is providing affordable service that meets the needs of our seniors, workers and post-secondary students. Since this service was launched, it has made a huge difference on the ground and in people’s lives. This is an investment that is contributing to the economic vitality of our communities while providing an essential service for people who may not have any other way to get around. It has been a resounding success from the start. Ridership has been even higher than predicted. This is a concrete example of how we are contributing to our rural regions.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Alexis Deschênes

“We are giving people in 13 regions five extra weeks of employment insurance to help seasonal workers. We also got rid of the one-week waiting period for these benefits.”

“Mr. Speaker, in our most recent economic update, we announced a funding extension for the pilot project providing five additional weeks of benefits in 13 economic regions, including the two regions in my riding. I believe my colleague’s riding is also included in this pilot project. This will provide five additional weeks of regular EI benefits to help bridge what is commonly referred to as the “spring gap”. This is in addition to other measures we have implemented, such as eliminating the one-week waiting period for EI benefits.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Pierre Paul-Hus

“The Conservatives only offer exaggerations and criticism instead of real solutions in their motions. Our government is getting results. Our economy is growing, exports and foreign investment are rising, and we have signed over 20 trade deals.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would invite my colleague to reread all the opposition motions that have been put forward in the past year. When it comes to the Conservatives, there is rarely anything substantive. It is always couched in hyperbole and exaggeration. There is little substance in their motions, and criticism comes easily. They are drafted in such a way that it is clear they cannot be supported. Personally, I would like to see more substance and more solutions in Conservative opposition day motions. We were talking about results, and we want results. Canada is expected to have the second-strongest growth in the G7 this year. Exports to non-U.S. markets are expected to double over the next decade. Foreign direct investment in Canada is up. We have signed more than 20 trade and partnership agreements around the world. These are concrete results that are making a real difference for the people we represent.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 27 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 →

In response to a question from Xavier Barsalou-Duval

“I do not support this Conservative motion. It is just for social media and offers no real solutions. Our government is actually helping the economy by finding new trade partners, building our own space industry, training skilled trades workers, and funding summer jobs for youth.”

“Mr. Speaker, today’s motion is on a serious topic. However, it is written in a very unserious way. As we know, the United States has fundamentally changed its approach to trade with countries around the world, not just with Canada. However, given our geographic proximity to the United States and given the fact that it is our main trading partner, this tariff dispute, which we did not initiate, is having specific repercussions on the Canadian economy, our workers and our businesses. At the same time, conflicts around the world, particularly in the Middle East and Europe, are having significant impacts on supply chains, which in turn affect the global economy. In light of today’s challenges, Canadians do not need political theatrics. They need a serious plan to strengthen our economy and make it more resilient. In last year’s general election, Canadians had a choice between a team offering empty slogans and divisive politics, and a team with a plan to strengthen our economy. That is exactly what they chose. Since our election, we have been working to diversify the Canadian economy, facilitate the implementation of major projects of national interest, strengthen domestic demand, and support our workers and businesses. When we look at the motion tabled today, it is clear that the official opposition is not taking the current challenges seriously enough. Once again, it is presenting us with a motion that seems designed more to fuel social media content and generate sound bites than to propose concrete solutions and work with us for the benefit of the Canadian public. I can list a few examples to illustrate our work and the results we are achieving. When it comes to economic diversification, we have been working for over a year to strengthen our trade partnerships around the world. This enables our businesses to access new markets and, at the same time, attract foreign investment to Canada. In fact, over the last 12 months, we have made significant progress in this regard. We have signed more than 20 new economic and defence partnerships and secured nearly $97 billion in foreign investment commitment. These are concrete results. They have an impact on the Canadian economy as well as on the ground, in our ridings. For example, agriculture is an important sector of the economy in Madawaska—Restigouche, where many farmers grow potatoes. The new agreement with Mexico will give Canadian potato farmers access to a market of over 130 million consumers. I have talked to business owners in my riding about this, and they are very excited about the benefits of this new agreement. That is how we build a strong economy: by providing new markets and new opportunities for Canadian businesses. I also want to mention that, in our work to strengthen the Canadian economy, we are also looking to develop new sectors and build capacity in areas where we may be less competitive right now. I will use the commercial space industry as an example. Right now, Canada is the only G7 country without sovereign space launch capabilities. That means that our country, our businesses and our institutions have to rely on foreign countries, particularly the United States, to launch their satellites into orbit. This reliance has real-world consequences. It is diverting investment to other countries. Naturally, since we lack sovereign space launch capabilities, investors turn to other countries. This leads to costly delays for our companies, since they need to launch their satellites through other countries. In addition, our critical infrastructure is at the mercy of decisions that are beyond our control. In an increasingly uncertain and competitive world, Canada can no longer rely on others to guarantee its access to space. That is why we introduced a bill on Canadian space launches. This legislation will be a real game-changer by establishing the framework needed to build Canada’s own space launch capabilities. The idea is to boost Canada’s commercial space launch industry. These changes will have real benefits for the Canadian economy. They will help develop a new commercial space industry in Canada and create numerous opportunities, particularly in the telecommunications sector. This is a particularly promising area. We often hear about connectivity problems in rural areas. Certain emerging technologies like low-earth orbit satellites show a lot of potential for improving connectivity in regions that are currently underserved by cellular networks. However, if we want a seat at the table, we need to have the capacity to develop these technologies in Canada and then be able to launch our own satellites. This also opens up all sorts of interesting opportunities in navigation and natural resource development in remote regions, as well as in the defence sector. This will also help reduce costly delays for Canadian businesses. We also expect it to attract billions of dollars in investment to Canada. In fact, since the announcement of this bill, several Canadian and foreign space launch companies, as well as foreign governments, have approached our government to signal interest in doing business in Canada for satellite launches. This is creating new partnership opportunities with our NATO allies and strengthening Canadian sovereignty. It is a concrete example of how our plan to strengthen the economy also helps strengthen our defence capabilities and our sovereignty. Moreover, as a member from an Atlantic riding, I am pleased to note that this potential is particularly significant in the Atlantic provinces, where several spaceports are under development, including the Maritime Launch Services spaceport in Nova Scotia and NordSpace’s Atlantic Spaceport Complex in Newfoundland and Labrador. When we talk about investments that will strengthen the domestic market, when we talk about investing in infrastructure, building housing and delivering major projects of national interest, we have to start by investing in our workforce and our workers. In last month’s economic update, we announced a plan to increase the number of workers in the country’s Red Seal trades. For starters, apprentices attending technical training can get up to $400 in financial support per week—$16,000 per year—plus a $5,000 bonus when they obtain their certification. We want to give them a financial incentive to help them complete their training from A to Z. We will also provide financial support to small and medium-sized businesses that offer on-the-job training because apprentices have to accumulate a certain number of hours to get certified. Specifically, we will provide up to $10,000 in wage subsidies to small and medium-sized businesses that take on apprentices. This is an effective way to increase the number of welders, electricians, plumbers and carpenters, to name just a few. These workers are essential to achieving our ambitious goal to build more in Canada. When we talk about providing employment opportunities, we also need to talk about youth. In budget 2025, we announced increased funding for the Canada summer jobs program. In my riding, it amounts to an investment of over $1.5 million this summer to support more than 400 jobs. These jobs provide practical work experience for young people in Madawaska—Restigouche. They will have an opportunity to work for community organizations, municipalities, day camps, the construction sector or SMEs. This wide range of employment opportunities might not have been available without this funding. For employers, SMEs, community organizations and municipalities, this is a game-changer. Over the past few weeks, I have called over 200 different employers in my riding to let them know the good news that they are going to receive funding this summer through this program. Based on the feedback I received, the program is making a real difference to them. I would like to take this opportunity to wish all the young people in my region who get jobs through the Canada summer jobs program a terrific summer. When we talk about building a stronger Canadian economy, we must also ensure that we build a fair and equitable system and that we are there for those who need it most. That is why all our efforts to strengthen the Canadian economy are accompanied by a social safety net. I am thinking of all the programs we have put in place over the years, including the Canada child benefit, the Canada disability benefit, the Canadian dental care plan, the affordable child care programs and the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. These programs make a huge difference to those who need them most. Unfortunately, when the official opposition is presented with measures that genuinely help people, their instinct is usually to oppose them. In closing, I think that we can see a contrast between this side of the House and the other side. The motion that is before us today is a joke. It was written in such a way that it cannot be supported. It seems to have been designed to generate sound bites for social media. It proposes very little in the way of concrete measures. On our side of the House, we do not let ourselves get distracted by this sort of grandstanding. From day one, we have remained focused on our work. Canadians gave us a clear mandate: to strengthen the Canadian economy and make it more resilient. That is what we are doing to deliver the results the public expects.”

• Echo ×20

  A repeated line

  “That is how we build Canada strong.”

  Said 20 times by 14 members since April 23.

  Every time it was said →