MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Jacques Gourde

Follow by RSS

Gourde campaigns against the Alto high-speed rail project and advocates for the elimination of federal taxes on diesel for producers. He grounds his arguments in specific financial data and local stories, remarking that “A farmer in Lanaudière told us that the skyrocketing cost of diesel is costing him $2,000 more a day.” He also pushes for greater government efficiency to speed up local business approvals.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
A–
89 / 100 over 40 statements
Signal 79 / 100
Relevance 84 / 100
Respect 100 / 100
Clarity 96 / 100
No habit stands out from the typical statement here. Averaged over the 40 of 43 statements graded so far.

In their own words

Says again and again

Statements 43

Oral Questions ·

Taxation

“The government is ignoring farmers whose land will be taken for high-speed rail to help European interests instead. I want the government to remove federal taxes on diesel.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, farmers along the high-speed rail route want to be heard by the Liberal government, and they deserve to be heard. However, it seems that the government listens more to visitors from Europe. What is wrong with this picture? The Liberals are silencing Canadians whose land will be expropriated by European-style projects that have no guarantee of long-term profitability. When will this Liberal government do something about Canadians’ suffering by axing the federal taxes on diesel?

Government Orders ·

Safe Social Media Act

“I want my colleague to talk about what consultations happened with Quebec. I also want him to say if the government will work with the opposition on this bill in committee, or if the majority will just force its decisions through.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like my colleague to circle back to the consultations with Quebec. At the same time, he could say a few words about the government’s co-operation on this bill in committee. Does he expect there will be co-operation, or will the majority make a decision against the opposition?

Oral Questions ·

Rail Transportation

“The government's deficit will be more than $330 billion over the next five years. The Alto rail project will cost another $150 billion. Is the $150 billion for the rail project included in that deficit number, or is it on top of it?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s latest report revealed that the deficits over the next five years will total more than $330 billion. In addition, the Alto project represents another $150 billion. The Liberal government is digging itself deeper and deeper into a bottomless pit of debt. Can the Liberals confirm whether or not the $150 billion for the Alto project is included in the $330-billion deficit?

Oral Questions ·

The Economy

“Six hundred thousand people in Quebec use food banks each month. We need to stop hunger from getting worse. Will the government vote for our plan to cut grocery costs by dropping federal diesel taxes until Canada Day?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, 600,000 Quebeckers use food banks every month. The Liberals voted against a Conservative motion to eliminate taxes on gas and diesel and to acknowledge the affordability crisis. They voted against the motion. Practical solutions are needed to stop hunger from worsening. Will the Liberal government vote in favour of our Conservative plan to reduce grocery bills by eliminating all federal taxes on diesel at least until Canada Day?

“Food bank visits are up by 117% since 2019, and almost a quarter of the people using them in Quebec have jobs. Have the Liberals broken their promise to Canadians?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, Food Banks Canada’s new 2026 report slams the Liberal Party’s promise. Food banks saw an increase of 189,000 visits compared to the previous year, representing an 8.7% increase. Since 2019, the number of visits has risen by 117%. Working people account for 23% of those receiving food assistance in Quebec. It is scandalous. Have the Liberals broken their promise to Canadians?

Statements by Members ·

Cost of Living

“Years of Liberal taxes and spending have made food, housing, and fuel too expensive. The government should pause fuel excise taxes, remove the GST from gas and diesel, and scrap the industrial carbon tax and clean fuel rules.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, after 11 years of Liberal taxes and inflationary spending, Canadians are facing ever-higher costs for food, housing and transportation while their wages are not keeping up. Food banks recorded an all-time high of 2.35 million visits in March, including nearly 776,000 visits by children. Inflation hit 3.1% in September, and gas prices jumped 27.8% in one year. When fuel costs go up, it is farmers, truckers and families who pay the price. Meanwhile, the federal debt continues to weigh heavily on future generations, and interest payments are swallowing up billions of dollars that could be serving Canadians. Conservatives want to put money back into families’ pockets, extend the federal fuel excise tax holiday, eliminate the GST on gas and diesel, scrap the industrial carbon tax and scrap the costly clean fuel regulations. Canadians work hard. Canadians deserve better. They deserve a future Conservative government.

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“The RCMP is investigating Lion Electric for fraud after the government gave it public money. Taxpayers paid for this mistake. I want to know if the government has done anything to protect people's money and stop this kind of spending.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government has thrown taxpayers under Lion Electric buses. Liberals talk about calculated risks and rigorous verification, Canadians paid the price for this fiasco. The RCMP searched Lion Electric’s headquarters as part of a financial fraud investigation. This is another clear indication that we must put an end to economic patronage. Has the Liberal government put in place any safeguards to protect Canadians’ money?

Oral Questions ·

Rail Transportation

“A government rail project is making people sign secrecy deals so it can take over farmland faster. One secret deal can be ended in 30 days. When does that 30-day clock start?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, yesterday, at the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, we learned that Alto, a project commissioned by the Liberal government, has been signing non-disclosure agreements with property appraisers, surveyors, well-known law firms, local authorities and even the former Quebec government, with the objective of accelerating the expropriation of agricultural land along the route. In the interests of full transparency, the secret agreement with the former Quebec government contains a 30-day termination clause. Does this period begin from the date of signature or from the date the notice of termination is served?

Government Orders ·

Building Canada Strong Act

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“We want to study all 240 pages of this bill line by line to make sure it will help Canada's economy. I look forward to taking part in that study.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 48 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, we really want the 240 pages of this bill to be studied properly, line by line, to ensure that Canada’s future will be more prosperous. I look forward to taking part in that.

In response to a question from Tamara Kronis

“People want the government to approve projects faster with less paperwork. Business owners want to create good jobs and help the country grow, but too many rules get in the way. I support a bill that helps us move faster.”
  • 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, that is an excellent question. It is very relevant. People want approvals to be done faster. They want less paperwork and less bureaucracy. Our entrepreneurs want a better Canada, a richer Canada and they want to ensure their employees have good jobs. They want prosperity for everyone. However, when we hit a wall in terms of government paperwork at the federal and other levels, it makes no sense. A bill that would allow us to move faster and restore Canada’s great entrepreneurial pride would be wonderful.

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“The Liberals hurt investor confidence by pushing for long environmental reviews. Before 2015, businesses around the world wanted to invest here. Now the government has to start over and try to win back that investment.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 47 of 100

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

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    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, it is music to my ears to hear my colleague, who has been a member of this House for the past 10 years all the while advocating for lengthy environmental studies and processes. The previous government, under Trudeau, undermined investor confidence. This government is now playing catch-up, trying to attract foreign investment so that investors come to Canada. The Liberals should have been doing that work sooner. They should have continued what we were doing prior to 2015. Investors from all over the world wanted to invest in Canada. They shattered investor confidence and now we have to start all over again. At least, hearing that sort of talk is music to my ears.

In response to a question from Alexis Deschênes

“This bill shortens the time for environmental reviews down to one year, instead of the eight years it used to take. I have said for a long time that these reviews should take one to two years so projects can move forward. We will study the bill in committee.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, everything I have seen in Bill C-39 aims to significantly shorten the timelines for the environmental assessment and approval process. We are talking about time frames that could be as short as one year. At one point in time, it took eight years. The government is now proposing a time frame of one year. As early as 2007, I said on LCN that the goal should be to complete the process within one to two years. Ultimately, projects must be allowed to proceed. We will review this issue at committee and see what we can do about it.

“This bill adopts Conservative ideas to cut red tape and approve projects within a year. Business investment per worker in Canada has dropped 16% in the last decade, while it grew 26% in the United States. Conservatives will only support this bill if it actually gets projects built faster. We will judge it by results, not promises.”
  • A repeated line

    “Canada has everything it needs to succeed.”

    Said 4 times by 4 members since June 2.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to Bill C‑39, which addresses an issue that is fundamental to the future of our country, namely Canada’s ability to build the infrastructure we need, develop our resources, attract investment and make decisions within a time frame that corresponds to the economic reality we are living in. I believe it is necessary to take action to ensure prosperity and to support all initiatives that are good for Canada and that strengthen our resilience. It is hard to be against virtue. It is crucial to make Canada stronger at a time when it may never have been so weak. That is the task we set for ourselves during the mandate of Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. Our mission was to build a strong Canada, proud and free. We were able to do that. I truly believe that Canada would have reached new heights if we had been able to stay in the driver’s seat. Unfortunately, things turned out differently, and the Liberal era has been one of decline in almost every aspect of society. However, in Bill C‑39, the Liberals finally acknowledge that they have gone too far with regulation and red tape and that it has hurt investment. Where Bill C‑39 is commendable is in its adoption of Conservative positions that we have been hammering home for 10 years in the House of Commons. We need to simplify overly complex federal processes, reduce excessively long approval times and eliminate regulatory overlaps between the different levels of government. Among other things, the bill proposes to better coordinate the process and target federal decisions within one year of a complete application. That is exactly what our Conservative leader has been hammering home in every forum available to him over the past few years. Let us be honest: For too long in Canada, we have talked about building so much more than we have actually built. I will say it simply: If the government is serious, we will consider the legislation that will truly speed up construction in Canada. When a measure can get a project built faster, get a worker a job faster or allow a company to invest in Canada instead of investing elsewhere, we have a duty to take a serious look at it. However, there is one condition: It has to work. That is where we are going to be very vigilant. Canadians have heard a lot of promises in recent years. They heard governments announce new ways of doing things, but it was often just new red tape, new bureaucracy. Since the new Prime Minister took office, the government has increasingly embraced Conservative themes. It speaks in terms of productivity, competitiveness, major projects, economic security and resource development. It now recognizes that Canada needs to build and cannot afford to stand still in a world where our partners and competitors are engaged in an investment race. Again, I will give the government the benefit of the doubt when it puts forward measures that can actually make a difference. However, it is important to understand one thing: Changing one’s language is not the same as changing reality. Let us look at the energy sector. Canada sits on extraordinary energy resources. We have oil, natural gas, hydroelectricity, uranium and energy expertise that is recognized worldwide. We also have critical minerals that our international partners rely on to keep their economies going. However, at times we have appeared unable to reach consensus on a basic principle: that Canada’s natural resources should be developed responsibly to generate prosperity, create jobs and strengthen economic security for all Canadians. What we cannot do is have all these resources, the workers, the entrepreneurs, the capital and the potential markets, yet be unable to make a decision when a project is put forward. When that happens, investment goes elsewhere, and once investment goes elsewhere, it does not always come back. Meanwhile, the United States is investing heavily in its infrastructure and industrial capacity, European countries are seeking to strengthen their energy security, and Asian economies are seeking to secure their supply chains. Governments around the world understand that the ability to produce, transport and export goods has become a matter of economic security. While Canada has all the resources it needs to play a major role on the international stage, and even possesses numerous competitive advantages over the United States, it is lagging behind. According to the Montreal Economic Institute, business investment per worker has fallen from $20,900 in 2014 to $17,600 in 2024. That is a 16% drop over 10 years. Over the same period, the United States increased its investment per worker by 26%. The question, then, is whether we will finally seize the opportunity to set ourselves apart. This is where I want to come back to what should be the guiding principle of our approach to Bill C-39. The Liberals’ intentions are not what matter here; results are. The government can tell us it wants to reduce delays. We will look at the delays. It can tell us it wants to attract investment. We will look at investments. It can tell us it wants to develop natural resources. We will look at the projects that are actually being built. It can tell us it wants to diversify Canada’s markets. We will look at new infrastructure and new exports. At some point, we have to move from talk to action, from words to deeds. I think that is precisely what Canadians expect from their representatives. We are going to ask tough questions, demand assurances, demand accountability, demand timelines, and demand results because the Liberals have gotten us used to plenty of announcements, but results that are slow in coming. If the Liberal government truly wants to turn the page on this way of doing things, then today is its chance to prove it. I believe that is the real challenge of Bill C-39. This bill could mark a change in direction, and we must ensure that this new direction leads to a Canada that builds more, produces more, exports more, and provides more opportunities for its workers and businesses. If next year we are still here talking about the same delays, the same obstacles, and the same projects that are still awaiting approval, we will have to be honest and admit that the change will have been nothing more than a change in rhetoric, and that will be a failure. We have the natural resources, the workers, the entrepreneurs, the expertise, and the business partnerships around the world. What we need to regain is the confidence to invest, the predictability to plan, and the political courage to make decisions and that is what we will be looking for in Bill C-39. Will it truly help speed up projects? Will it truly reduce duplication? Will it truly give investors clarity on what to expect? If the answer is yes, then the government may earn our trust to support it. If the answer is no, then we will have to ask the government to go much further, because Canada cannot afford to wait. We will not judge this government by its intentions. We will judge it by what it builds. We will judge it by the investments it succeeds in attracting. We will judge it by the jobs it helps create. We will judge it by the infrastructure that is being built, because Canada has everything it needs to succeed. If the government truly wants to turn the page on the legacy of the Trudeau era, if it truly wants to demonstrate that Canada is back in the business of major investments, it should not do so merely through speeches, press releases, or bills, but on the ground, in our regions, our ports, our railways, our industries and our businesses. That is where the success of Bill C-39 will be measured.

“This bill speeds up environmental reviews and project approvals. For the past 10 years, some Liberals used these reviews to delay projects. I want to know if all Liberals truly agree on speeding them up now.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as we know, Bill C‑39 means that environmental assessments will be conducted much more quickly. Approvals should be made much faster. We also know that, over the past 10 years, there have been a number of people in the Liberal caucus who really liked environmental studies because they delayed certain projects. Is the caucus now unanimous, including the people who really wanted to delay projects?

“This bill does what my party wanted to do in 2015, before the Prime Minister tried to undo our work. Why did the government wait 11 years to do it?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague’s speech. I found it very interesting. It seems to be a continuation of what we wanted to do in 2015 after the election when Mr. Trudeau took office and tried to undo all the work we had done. Why wait 11 years to get this done?

Oral Questions ·

Taxation

“High diesel prices will make food more expensive for Canadians. Canada has plenty of oil, so diesel should not cost this much. I want the government to vote for our plan to remove taxes on diesel until July 2027 and create a fuel reserve.”
  • A repeated line

    “Canada has the fourth-largest oil reserves in the world.”

    Said 8 times by 7 members since October 5.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, after farmers, consumers will be the next to bear the brunt of rising food prices. We have the fourth-largest oil reserves in the world, so there is no reason Canadians should be paying so much more for diesel. The Liberals have placed us in a vulnerable position. Will they commit to adopting our Conservative plan to eliminate taxes on diesel until July 2027 and establish a strategic reserve to ensure a stable supply? Will the Liberals vote in favour of our motion?

“High diesel prices could cost Quebec farmers over $200 million a year. The government needs to act and give our farmers a break on energy costs.”
  • A repeated line

    “The Liberals are all talk and no results.”

    Said 13 times by 12 members since September 21.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, with the Liberals, it is all talk and no results. A farmer in Lanaudière told us that the skyrocketing cost of diesel is costing him $2,000 more a day. According to the Union des producteurs agricoles du Québec, the rising cost of diesel could cost Quebec farmers more than $200 million a year. When will the Liberal government finally confront the skyrocketing cost of energy and give our farmers a break?

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

“We need to cut the fuel tax to help farmers and consumers. Diesel prices are going up, and farmers have to pay much more for fuel to bring in their crops while selling their food at regular market prices. They need relief.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague’s speech. He seems to be assuming that if we lower taxes, the oil companies will pocket that money. We could discuss and debate that, but what I find unfortunate about his remarks is that he overlooked the fact that diesel prices are currently rising. Let me give an example from the agricultural sector. This fall, farmers have pay up to 25¢, 30¢, 40¢ or 60¢ more per litre to bring in the fall harvest, a harvest that will not necessarily sell for a higher price, because farmers sell their products at the prevailing world market prices. They are the ones who will have to absorb this staggering increase in energy costs. I think it would be a good idea to give them a little breathing room, but my colleague does not seem to agree that consumers should get that breathing room.

“The federal government should not move ahead with the Alto train project. The parties that just won the Quebec election oppose it. If the federal government takes land in Quebec for the train anyway, it will push Quebec further toward separating from Canada.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to talk about the election, thank those who have left and congratulate the winners, but I want to start by talking about something I noticed in my colleague’s speech. He said something that struck me. We saw the former Quebec government doing the Liberal Party’s bidding when it came to Alto. Everyone who was part of that government is now gone. On the other hand, those who were against Alto, namely the Parti Québécois and the Conservative Party of Quebec, have made huge gains. One has formed the government, and the other has risen from the ashes and elected 19 members to the National Assembly. If the government still intends to push ahead with the Alto project, I think it will need support in Quebec. I do not know where it will find it, but pushing ahead and expropriating Quebec land through the Crown—what message does that send to a party hoping for sovereignty?

Statements by Members ·

Canadian Oil

“Canada has a lot of oil, but fuel is too expensive because of Liberal taxes. These taxes stop us from refining and moving our own fuel, which raises prices for workers and families. The government should adopt the Conservative plan. We want to cut diesel taxes, approve energy projects faster, and produce our own fuel to make Canada more affordable.”
  • A repeated line

    “Canada has the fourth-largest oil reserves in the world.”

    Said 8 times by 7 members since October 5.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I used to have a red tractor, but I sold it because diesel got too expensive. The “reds” and the economy do not go well together. With the fourth-largest oil reserves in the world, there is no reason why Canadians should be paying so much for fuel. For the past 11 years, Liberal taxes have been holding back projects that would enable us to refine and transport Canadian fuel across the country. When our farmers, truck drivers and contractors have to pay more to do their jobs, every family ends up paying the price. Our pressure on the Liberal government has already led to the suspension of the federal excise tax on fuel and the extension of that tax relief. We will continue to fight for all Canadians. Our Conservative plan is clear: Eliminate taxes on diesel until 2027, remove taxes that penalize diesel production, speed up approvals, offer a 100% deduction for energy investments and create a strategic reserve of refined fuel. We need to produce fuel at home, be self-sufficient and make our country more affordable.