Karim Bardeesy

In response to a question from Kelly Block

“Some seniors have waited too long for their pension payments because of processing delays. We acted to fix this, and backlogged applications have dropped by 41%. Updating our system was necessary to prevent even worse problems for millions of Canadians who rely on these benefits.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to address the issue of missed payments. Some seniors have waited longer than they should. These delays were operational issues for files largely involving new applications or changes to payments. The department has worked to improve processing times with an OAS action plan implemented to improve service delivery, which has led to a 41% decrease in the inventory of new OAS applications. It is important to compare the question that the hon. member asks with the cost of not acting quickly. If we had not acted quickly, millions of OAS, EI and CPP recipients would have been stuck with an old system that would have potentially led to much worse outcomes for them. We are very proud of the transformation that is happening, which is taking place in a responsible and transparent manner, in a series of well-planned and prudent phases within the appropriated budget.”

In response to a question from Kelly Block

“We are spending money to update the old computer systems that send out pensions and employment insurance. The project costs more than we first thought because online threats and scams are getting worse, and replacing 60-year-old systems is hard. The work is going well. Millions of seniors have already been moved to the new system without missing any payments.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek for her concern and her engagement on this, and I want to convey, on behalf of the government, that we do take those questions seriously. I want to address how the system is working at ESDC and issues around the accuracy of payments. I also want to clear up some misinformation surrounding program costs. Let us start at the beginning of this journey. In 2010, the Auditor General noted there was a high risk that in time, the IT infrastructure would not be able to support the delivery of core programs like OAS, EI and CPP, based on systems that were decades old. We knew an upgrade was essential. Since 2017, we have been investing in benefits delivery modernization because Canadians deserve functional, responsive and dependable services. We knew that any interruption to accurate and on-time payments could significantly affect recipients’ ability to meet their daily needs, such as buying food or paying rent, needs that are addressed significantly by those supplements and benefits. We also knew that this would be an incredibly complicated task and that doing the job correctly would require significant investment. Between 2017 and March 31 of this year, the federal government spent $1.8 billion on the benefits delivery modernization program. The recently completed old age security on benefits delivery modernization project was delivered as planned and under budget. The total cost, however, has evolved, and that is due to what we now understand and what we are learning about some of the evolving threats and changes in the information technology space. Current estimates have evolved over time as we have gained a greater understanding of the complexity of unravelling 60-year-old systems. The 2023 Office of the Auditor General report acknowledged the department’s commitment to revising estimates, as I think is appropriate. The program’s long-term estimate of $6.6 billion now covers the completion of four main projects by 2031: the full transformation of benefits delivery for all old age security, employment insurance and Canada pension plan payments, as well as modernizing all of ESDC’s call centres. What is different from when the estimates were first generated? Well, the cybersecurity landscape in 2017 was much less complex than it is today. Fraud and cyber-threats have been increasing in speed, scale and sophistication. This impacts the complexity and cost of the modernization. In other words, the threat environment raises the cost of keeping Canadians secure, and we are responding proactively, ultimately to protect the financial health of the program and the interests of Canadian taxpayers. Of the $473.4 million announced in the 2026 spring economic update, $176 million over two years will be used to increase OAS processing capacity and for OAS system maintenance and support. In terms of some of the questions the member has raised regarding the selection of proponents, we are fully transparent and we follow standard practices. Every contract includes clear deliverables. All contracts are competitively awarded and proactively disclosed in accordance with the rules in place. In terms of the beneficiaries, of who is benefiting from this transformation and the hard work that has been done by hard-working public servants and others, 7.4 million old age security clients were migrated to the new platform last year. Each one continued to receive payments as planned. The new system is currently providing 7.7 million seniors with pension benefits every month, many of whom rely on OAS as their primary or only source of income. The system is operating correctly, and 89.6 million payments have been issued with a value of nearly $84.7 billion. The number of clients waiting beyond their first month for payment has declined, and the department continues to ensure that these cases are processed and that clients have access to the benefits to which they are entitled.”

• 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 Pat Kelly

“Canada's debt compared to our economy is the lowest in the G7, and our deficit is shrinking. Our spending pays for dental care, child care, and help for struggling industries. I want to know which of these programs the opposition would cut.”

“Mr. Speaker, in case the Hansard did not pick it up, I want to make sure it is heard that it is the deficit-to-GDP ratio that is declining. The debt-to-GDP ratio is the lowest in the G7 by some considerable margin. The deficit-to-GDP ratio and balancing operating spending with revenues are two of the key fiscal anchors that we are achieving. Again, I refer my colleague to page 12 of the spring economic update for some more context. I would invite him to reflect on which of the investments and key supports we are bringing in on the affordability and business support side that he would cut. Would it be the groceries and essentials benefit? Would it be national child care, which is supporting thousands of people in my riding and, I know, in his riding? Would it be the Canada dental care plan, or the investments we announced yesterday to support the steel, aluminum and copper sectors, which are struggling because of the tariffs? I think Canadians know that these investments are the right ones.”

In response to a question from Pat Kelly

“The world economy is facing big disruptions, but our government is managing money responsibly. Our deficit is low compared to other major countries, and we are cutting government waste. This leaves us with money to help Canadians with the cost of food, gas, and housing.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the House that our government’s focus remains clear and disciplined. We are controlling what we can control, which means maintaining fiscal sustainability while making targeted, high-impact investments for Canadians; maintaining our fiscal anchors; and ensuring that every dollar spent on behalf of Canadians supports growth, resilience and improving the well-being of Canadians. That is the direction we need right now, and it is in the context of global changes we are witnessing, which are sudden and, I would say, unprecedented. Global economies are more than a year into a profound rupture, characterized by the trade decisions made by the U.S. administration. Economic security, industrial policy and geopolitical competition are increasingly shaping investment, trade and financial decisions. Of course, the recent conflict in the Middle East, which has disrupted key shipping routes and damaged energy infrastructure, has pushed energy prices higher, underscoring the fragility of global supply chains and adding to already elevated uncertainty. Despite this environment, the government is delivering an $11.5‑billion improvement in the projected 2025-26 budgetary balance. This strength carries into future years, improving the budgetary balance relative to last year’s budget by an average of $10.7 billion per year from 2026-27 to 2029-30 before new measures. I will note that, in addition, our deficit-to-GDP ratio, one of the key fiscal anchors, is well below the G7 average, as shown on page 12 of the spring economic update. Fortunately, this fiscal room allows the government to improve affordability and raise Canadians’ standard of living through targeted and responsible policy measures, particularly in the areas of fuel, food and housing affordability. This is a move that started in budget 2025 and indeed, before then, with some income tax cuts for which we were happy to get the support of the other side. It marked a strategic shift in the government’s management of public finances, focusing on expanding federal capital spending to mobilize investments while maintaining fiscal responsibility. Our budget 2025, as members know, set out a clear plan to build the strongest economy in the G7. We are moving toward that with very strong growth rates projected in relation to other G7 countries, and again, the strongest fiscal position in the G7, in particular with a debt-to-GDP ratio well below that of our G7 peers. Our plan remains rooted in fiscal responsibility, not for its own sake, but to create the capacity to invest our long-term economic strength and greater self-reliance. I want to mention again that there are two fiscal anchors, which are balancing operating spending with revenues by 2028-29 and maintaining a declining deficit-to-GDP ratio, both of which we are obtaining. We also remain committed to the disciplined implementation of budget 2025 efficiency measures, including the comprehensive expenditure review, which, together with other measures in budget 2025, total $60 billion in savings and revenues over 5 years. We are now in the implementation phase. The focus is turning toward targeted, ongoing reviews, beginning with efforts to rein in spending on external management and other consulting services. These are not easy decisions; they are challenging but necessary actions. We will continue to support our objective of spending less to invest more. In these serious times, with these serious geopolitical headwinds, it is important to make targeted investments, control what we can control, maintain our fiscal anchors and attend to the affordability and economic needs of Canadians.”

• Echo ×14

  A repeated line

  “Canada has the strongest fiscal position in the G7.”

  Said 14 times by 7 members since May 1.

  Every time it was said →

“Our exports to Europe went up by 31% in 2025. Based on my colleague's experience there, how does selling to different countries help our steel, aluminum, and copper industries?”

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague has extensive experience in trade, particularly in Europe. We know that efforts to diversify exports are beginning to yield results. Exports to Europe increased by 31% in 2025. In my colleague’s experience, particularly with Portugal and other countries he knows well, what role does diversification play in the steel, aluminum, and copper sectors?”

“The government just put a lot of money into the port of Contrecoeur. I want to know if this money will help the Quebec businesses the member talked about.”

“Mr. Speaker, I really enjoyed my colleague’s speech and that of my colleague from Joliette—Manawan . My colleague talked about Quebec businesses. As a member from Ontario and parliamentary secretary, I am more concerned with businesses in Ontario, but I know that the minister and my colleague, the parliamentary secretary and member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, are very involved with Quebec businesses. I also appreciate my colleague’s comments on specific businesses. My colleague from Joliette—Manawan and I heard about them at the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology. Now, I have a question for him. We know that the government has just made major investments in the port of Contrecoeur. Will these investments help the companies he is talking about?”

“The opposition keeps attacking good programs. Building a national wealth fund takes a long time. I want the member to say which projects in his area could benefit from that fund.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to make a brief comment on this opposition day motion, which is part of a pattern of opposition day motions that seem intended to tear down or attack things that are working to support the most vulnerable in our society, like the interim federal health program for refugees or now, with this motion, to tear down something that we are in the process of building. We know that sovereign wealth funds take generations and years to build up and to provide benefits. I want to ask my friend from Kings—Hants, what are the projects in his riding and his region that he thinks could ultimately benefit from that investment, from this fund?”

• Vague
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Clarity 27 of 100

  Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Greg McLean

“Any mistakes in my speech are my own. I invite the member to support our clean electricity plan, our rebates for electric cars, and our plan to build more chargers.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to inform my colleague from Calgary Centre and the House that Alexandre Moreau, our parliamentary internship program intern, who was in his office, assisted me with some of the research for this speech. However, any errors, including the one the hon. member is alleging, are definitely my own. Perhaps I will take the opportunity to talk about the record of the Wynne and McGuinty governments, in which I served as a staffer, another time, but I will invite my colleague, if he is indeed supportive of that broad range of opportunities in the clean energy space, to get behind our clean electricity strategy, the rebates for electric vehicles and our electric vehicle charging infrastructure strategy.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  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 →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 32 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 Kevin Lamoureux

“This bill updates our laws to protect buyers and help new ideas grow. It lets businesses start using new measuring devices while they wait for official approval. This will help new tools get to market faster and build a stronger economy.”

“Mr. Speaker, yes, this is about modernization. It has the intention to both protect consumers and unleash new innovations. For instance, the provision to allow businesses to introduce a new measurement device into the marketplace while awaiting evaluation and approval by Measurement Canada is a real game-changer. It allows those innovations to come to market, to be tested and to be deployed. Again, I am thinking of the comments from my colleague from La Pointe-de-l’Île. We can hopefully get the kind of relationship between providers, Measurement Canada and the end users of these products, which are other businesses, as this is generally in the business-to-business space, where we can create a more dynamic economy where these devices are coming on board more quickly, while doing the key consumer protection work that is at the core of what Canadians expect.”

In response to a question from Mario Beaulieu

“This bill helps businesses work with government inspectors so they can sell their products. I will talk to the member to learn more about what went wrong with that specific business.”

“Mr. Speaker, the story my colleague just told is very disappointing. The effect of the bill will be to help providers participate in the economy. I am willing to talk to the member after or during the debate to get a better understanding of what happened with that particular business. The purpose of the bill is to help providers have a good relationship with Measurement Canada so that they can bring their products to market.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  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 →

In response to a question from Kelly McCauley

“These unfair grocery practices are unacceptable. This bill does not fix them directly, but other recent laws and our competition rules are helping to solve the problem.”

“Mr. Speaker, I think all Canadians, when they hear stories of the kind that my hon. colleague describes and that have been brought to the House, share a significant amount of concern. It is not acceptable. As someone who used to teach students who were working part-time in the grocery sector, they would tell me stories about some of the practices that were being suggested to them, with respect to related practices like shrinkflation or perhaps more overtly problematic practices like the one the member is talking about. I will share that while this piece of legislation does not address that directly, I would also commend the House for recently passing the bill brought forward by the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells, which does some work to address this problem around transparency. There are also tools through the Competition Bureau. The kind of practice the member is talking about is unacceptable and we will get to the bottom of it.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 38 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 →
• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I support this bill. It updates our measurement laws for the first time in fifty years to handle new digital technology, like electric vehicle chargers. It also cuts red tape and makes sure buyers and businesses can trust that scales and meters are accurate.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure, as I mentioned, to speak to this bill, which came from the other place. This bill is a significant set of amendments to our weights and measurement system. It is a set of amendments that really looks to modernize our trade instrumentation, which is so important to the smooth functioning of our economy, the information of consumers and the clarity and transparency needed by businesses and consumers alike. This brings to mind my first experience of this as a worker in the weights and measures system. I was a new arrival in London, England, on a working visa and chose to find employment, as many people do. I got a job at a cheese shop called Bloomsbury Cheeses in London, England. The first act of work in any retail business that involves a deli with meat or cheese of any kind is to put the cheese on the scale. I remember putting that cheese on the scale, whether it was Cornish yarg, a nice Stilton or a Lancashire. In the English context, people love their cheeses and they love their English cheeses. I would engage with customers. The customers would look at what was provided, what the weight of the item was and how much it cost. We used to put a little piece of wax paper under the cheese to make sure the cheese was not contaminating the scale and vice versa. I remember one customer asking me, “Well, what’s the weight of that wax paper? Are you charging me for the wax paper and not just the cheese?” I did not have a good response for that customer. Perhaps it was a good sign that retail was neither my forte nor the sector I should be in. I was soon dismissed by both the customer and Bloomsbury Cheeses. However, that was a good reminder of the trust that is needed in this sector. It is also a good reminder and a good opportunity to mention two of the very finest cheese shops in my riding of Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park, the Cheese Boutique, a legendary cheese shop on Ripley Avenue, as well as the Thin Blue Line in my neighbourhood of Roncesvalles on Roncesvalles Avenue. This work of weights and measures is really related to trust, especially when we are amending a piece of legislation like this, which is related to an organization that goes back to the 1870s. In fact, weights and measures are in the Canadian Constitution. Section 91.17 of the BNA Act, now the Constitution Act, puts the responsibility for weights and measures solely in the federal eye. In 1873, we had the first Weights and Measures Act of Parliament. That set up the system for the kind of work that is done to help the economy operate in a smooth way and in a very important way. Of course, we may remember the most recent major amendment that was done before the set of amendments we are talking about now, which was the 1971 set of amendments to the Weights and Measures Act, which very crucially, and I think to the ultimate satisfaction of most Canadians, recognized the use of the metric system in Canada. It also required metric measurements on most product labels. Some of us may have lived through those times and remember the kinds of measurements, the kinds of things that were provided in that era, or we may have parents or grandparents who lived through those times. Canadians embraced the metric system. It it not just for athletic measurement. It is for all kinds of measurement. The U.S. remains a bit of an outlier, although in the trade system we will notice that the Americans, in fact, do adopt the metric system. This is about trust. This is about the trust of the tools and the information that is provided in this very key part of the goods-facing economy. Measurement Canada, is a significant organization of 320 hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast, with offices in many communities in our country. Measurement Canada, which used to be called weights and measures Canada, is probably best known by Canadians for those labels on the consumer gas pumps, which we have been visiting. Each of those visits is a bit more painful of late since the war in the Middle East. I am very glad that our government has brought forward measures to bring real excise tax relief in this challenging moment for Canada, and Canadians are seeing the benefits of that. We will see Measurements Canada’s work on those consumer gas pumps, but its work spreads far more widely. It touches a number of sectors. It touches energy sectors. It touches export-oriented sectors. This piece of legislation is a very important piece of work that does a couple things. I will just read from the summary of the bill. It is important to outline what we are talking about here in this bill from the other place. It states: This [bill] amends the Weights and Measures Act to, among other things, clarify existing powers, duties and functions of the Minister of Industry and inspectors, provide the Minister with certain powers, including with respect to sampling when devices are examined and with respect to corrective and preventive measures, and provide inspectors with certain powers. It also amends the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act to, among other things, broaden the definition of “meter”, provide the president [of Measurement Canada] with the authority to grant certain exemptions, clarify the steps required to put a device into service, clarify existing powers, duties and functions of the Minister and inspectors, provide the Minister with certain powers, including with respect to sampling when meters are examined and with respect to corrective and preventive measures, and provide inspectors with certain powers. This is a significant modernization of this piece of legislation, which again has not been looked at in a major way since the era of digital measurement, the era of, in fact, our metric system. It takes place in the context of the major 1971 modernization. There was a whole lot of infrastructure and a whole lot of process necessary to prepare Canadians for the conversion to metric. Canada’s History magazine writes: Chaired by former Canadian Pacific Railway executive Stevenson Gossage, [there was a Metric Commission, which] oversaw more than 100 sector committees that monitored and prepared conversion plans for a wide range of interests and industries. There were problems figuring out which sectors should convert fully and which, especially industries reliant on American materials, should take it slowly. Again, we have this system of weights and measures, which is really the lifeblood of the economy, that is supporting sectors far and wide in the energy space, in the consumer product space, in the retail space and beyond. Why do we need this modernization? Why are we bringing this piece of legislation forward today? Conversations about modernizing this act and the other acts started before the COVID era. The hard work to accelerate this work really started in 2023 with Measurement Canada, with 320 hard‑working public servants from coast to coast working on this on the front lines at the gas stations, examining hundreds of devices a year. I just want to pause and give a tribute to the work of Measurement Canada and its workers. On an annual basis, Measurement Canada calibrates and certifies approximately 1,529 standards of mass, volume, temperature, electricity and gas, as well as tests equipment to certify measuring devices. We measure things and we need to test the things themselves that do the measurement. On an annual basis, Measurement Canada evaluates and approves around 300 new prototype measuring devices and the technology for use in trade in Canada. Each organization audits and oversees more than 230 authorized service providers and 700 registered technicians to inspect and certify approximately 95% of measuring devices used in trade on its behalf, including all those gas pumps and all these measuring devices in the trucking sector, in the goods movement sector and in the consumer movement sector for all kinds of goods. Obviously, there is a key relationship here with our exports and the need not only to diversify our exports but also to protect ourselves from the tariffs that we are being faced with right now. Measurement Canada is at the centre of all this work, and it is really important to point out and to celebrate the hard‑working men and women who do this work on the front lines. These are frontline workers who are doing this work as part of a broader sector of weights and measures and technical professionals. There is a relationship, obviously, to the standards sector. Why are we doing this now? What is the cause? The reality is that devices today have capabilities that were not possible decades ago. They are not strictly mechanical or a very simple digital interface. I referred to that scale at Bloomsbury Cheeses, from my short‑lived time as a cheese retailer. There is now lots more sophistication. Scales now include sensors and lasers. Devices have software updates that happen instantly. Smart communities transmit data about electricity and natural gas use in milliseconds. The context of all this is trust. When someone receives a bill for a consumer product that involves some sort of weight or measurement, they want to know that the measurement is correct. In this increasingly digitally connected era, Canadians are somewhat removed. Some of the benefits of this technology are that it allows this work to happen instantaneously, or practically instantaneously, and remotely. Canadians have an expectation that the inputs into the decisions that are informing how much they are paying for any consumer product, whether at the pumps, in their homes or elsewhere, is reliable. I think it is really important to have a trusted institution like Measurement Canada at the centre of this work. The good news is this is not just about regulation and the kinds of changes that we need to make to keep up with the changing digital technologies. This is also about the potential benefit to Canada from the innovation in this sector of measurement, digital measurement in particular. The reforms that we are bringing about here would increase competitiveness. Temporary permissions, for instance, would encourage innovation and allow industry to test out new devices in the marketplace under specific conditions, instead of waiting to be fully evaluated and approved. We hear from our innovators constantly that they want to get their device or product out into the market. They want to have a controlled setting. They want to have regulatory sandboxes or other places where there is equipment to show that their product is available, often Canadian products and digital products, and then find a market for that. If we do that here in Canada through this amendment to the legislation, then we will have created a test bed, a set of experiences for these digital product innovators in particular, as well as other innovators, to then take their market experience, take the effective endorsement that might result from their deployment in the marketplace in this new accelerated way, and then look to export. Another reform we are bringing is to bring in the flexibility to reduce the regulatory burden, which we know takes place in a variety of sectors. This set of legislative amendments is part of an attempt to reduce the regulatory burden in the measurement sector, which touches pretty much all goods-servicing sectors. It is also fiscally prudent. We know that when these devices come on board, they come on board in batches and bulk. If we require inspection of every single device, that is an undue burden. If we can inspect a sampling of the devices and ensure that the manufacturing processes of all devices being produced under that line meet a certain quality, then maybe we do not need as much of a burden on inspecting every single device, taking a risk-based approach to inspection work. The proposed amendments would allow inspectors to inspect thousands of devices of the same type using any means, including statistical sampling, to align the acts and increase the overall efficiency of the agency’s operations. There is a competitiveness to industry with a bill like this. There is also quite a bit of efficiency that can be enabled with this work. I think this kind of legislation is a very interesting window into the full continuum of transportation- and energy-related sectors. We sometimes hear from the other side a celebration only for conventional energy. On this side, we have taken a more well-rounded position that we can have both conventional and clean electricity, and clean energy generated. A fun fact about Measurement Canada is that it was one of the first, or perhaps the first, federal government agency to acquire electrically powered trucks in its fleet. Measurement Canada is on the front line of acquiring an asset that is both good for the planet and good for the pocketbook, but is also on the front line of the work that it is doing. I recently announced on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, significant funding toward electric vehicle charging infrastructure across Canada. Canadians know that we are coming out with an electric vehicle charging infrastructure strategy, as well as a national electricity strategy. These technologies and this work of bringing the electric vehicle experience to as many Canadians as possible requires standards and it requires a different form of measurement. I was at the EV & Charging Expo in Toronto a few weeks ago, making that announcement on behalf of the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. The number of companies that are popping up with digital solutions to our electric vehicle charging demands, needs and potential is truly impressive. Through the amendments to the legislation I am talking about today, we would have the opportunity to catalyze an economy that is coming into being and is ready to do its part for Canadians and to help create new companies on behalf of Canadians. I have some other facts about Measurement Canada and where it is engaging. I mentioned the electricity sector. The Canadian Gas Association has shown its support for this legislation in its comments when it went through the other place. Electricity and natural gas utilities and other energy suppliers are keenly interested in the legislation, as are other agencies and departments like the Canadian Grain Commission, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Transport Canada and Natural Resources Canada. I am looking across the aisle. I know that some of my friends across the aisle represent some of these communities. Measurement Canada has offices in Vancouver, Kelowna, Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Regina, Winnipeg, Thunder Bay, Sudbury, London, Stoney Creek, Mississauga, Markham, Belleville, Ottawa, where the laboratories and headquarters of Measurement Canada also exist, Montreal, Quebec, Moncton, Dartmouth and St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador. The work is resource-, travel- and labour-intensive. It depends on specialized, purpose-built test equipment and it continues to expand into new areas, as I mentioned, not only electric vehicle charging but also clean fuels and even things like the automation of measurement-based financial transactions. This is really important public service work and it is all in the context of trust. If Canadians can trust the inputs into their economic decisions, they are more likely to trust the outputs. I think this piece of legislation plays a very important role in doing that. I am going to say a few words in French about the changes outlined in Bill S-3, an act to amend the Weights and Measures Act, the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act, the Weights and Measures Regulations and the Electricity and Gas Inspection Regulations. The purpose of this bill is to modernize laws that have not been amended for more than 50 years. The last significant change was when Canada adopted the metric system, the International System of Units. That was over 50 years ago. Our system now is more digital and automated. Workers at this thriving organization that serves the public need tools to keep up with changes in the weights and measures system. In my opinion, this bill, which amends several acts, gives the government and the private sector the tools they need to bring business innovations to market and make business services more positive for Canadians. This piece of legislation would modernize an essential system of trust that Canadians have been relying on for many years, not thinking about it but taking it for granted. When we see that Measurement Canada sticker at the gas pump, we know that we are going to get the authoritative and correct measurement. We want to catalyze and create an economy that allows the digital tools to be deployed so that we can accelerate the deployment of tools for weights and measures in more sectors, especially the electric vehicle sector, so that we can create opportunities for Canadian businesses to participate in this very important digital economy, and so that Canadians can continue to trust the information they get, whether as consumers or as businesses, and so that we can do the work of continuing to protect Canadians, the very important work that the hard-working men and women of Measurement Canada do every day, which develops our economy, creates competition, creates efficiencies and builds trust for everyone.”

“I am speaking on this bill. It updates our laws on weights and measures.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to speak to this bill, which has come to us from the other place and would amend various acts related to weights and measures here in Canada. This piece of legislation is in the context of the historic work of this organization.”