MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Kelly DeRidder

Follow by RSS

DeRidder pushes to eliminate all federal taxes on gas and diesel to cut living costs, and sponsors Bill C-240 to bring treatment programs into prisons. As shadow minister for women, she presses for protection from intimate partner violence and scrutiny of online harms to children. She argues in plain, personal terms, drawing on her own recovery from addiction: “People can and do recover.”Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
A
91 / 100 over 48 statements
Signal 81 / 100
Relevance 88 / 100
Respect 100 / 100
Clarity 95 / 100
No habit stands out from the typical statement here. Averaged over the 48 of 65 statements graded so far.

Statements 65

Government Orders ·

Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing Orders

In response to a question from Terry Dowdall

“Canadians are losing trust in Parliament because of members switching parties and changes to committees. We need to keep a balance in committees so we can hold the government accountable.”
Official Hansard

Yes, Mr. Speaker, absolutely, I am seeing an erosion of trust in Parliament with what is happening here, with not only the floor crossings that have happened but also this reshuffling of committees. Canadians do not understand why this decision is being made, especially in my riding, because we need to maintain the balance to ensure we can properly hold the government to account.

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“The Prime Minister promised to work with other parties, but he broke that promise. He is trying to take control of committees by adding extra members from his own party. That stops us from checking his work and holding the government to account.”
  • 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, yes, a year ago Canadians elected a minority Liberal government that promised it would be collaborative with the members of the opposition and make changes in a collaborative manner. What we are seeing now is another broken promise from the Prime Minister because in no way is it collaborative to stack committees so that we cannot hold the government to account and be able to properly scrutinize legislation. Not only is that a power grab, ensuring it is stacking the committees. The government would have the majority with one additional member, but instead of going with that, it wants two to really ensure that our voices are—

In response to a question from Martin Champoux

“I oppose this motion. The government is trying to change the rules to take control of committees and avoid accountability. They built a fake majority by convincing opposition members, including me, to switch sides behind closed doors. This goes against what Canadians voted for.”
  • A repeated line

    “That should concern every single member of the House.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since April 27.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because what we are witnessing is not just another procedural move in the House. It is something deeper and far more concerning. For the past number of months, we have watched a pattern unfold that points to the reality of our democracy and its being under pressure, yet Canadians are not hearing about it. It is not leading in the national news, and it is certainly not being examined with the seriousness it deserves. Instead, Canadians are being told a different story. They are being told that everything is normal and that this is politics as usual, but it is not. By-elections have been framed as sweeping wins for the government, as validation of a majority, but that all those by-elections did was keep the main election results the same. The majority was secured through active recruitment of opposition members. Canadians elected balance and accountability, and what they are getting instead is a slow erosion of that balance, happening right now in front of them. It is not being resisted by the very institutions that should be asking the hardest questions: How was the majority actually secured, how did we get here and why are the Liberals actively recruiting members of the opposition for power? Inside the House we know exactly what this means. Committees are where accountability happens. It is where the government is tested. Now, through a series of calculated moves, the government is trying to control them. It does not stop there. This majority was secured through the active recruitment of opposition members, members who were elected under one banner, by voters who trusted them to represent a certain set of values and are now being drawn into another. Where is the scrutiny? Where are the questions from the media asking why this is happening? Instead, too often the narrative shifts. The focus turns to blaming Conservatives for raising concerns rather than to examining the actions these concerns created in the first place. Even more concerning is what we have heard from some of the members who have crossed the floor. Most avoid speaking openly about it at all, but one openly admitted discomfort with the democratic process itself, specifically with the election of the Deputy Speaker. Crossing the floor became, in part, a response to that frustration. Let us think about that: a dissatisfaction with democracy, followed by a decision that helps consolidate power in the hands of the government. It is a complete dumpster fire. That should concern every single member of the House, regardless of party. I want to make this real for Canadians. Over the past months, opposition members have come forward to say they have been approached; conversations have happened behind closed doors; pressure, subtle or otherwise, has been applied; and Canadians have not heard about it. These are not rumours. These are conversations taking place behind the scenes, away from public view and away from accountability. I can tell the House that I was one of those members who was approached. I was asked to cross the floor. I was asked to leave behind the people of Kitchener Centre who had elected me as a Conservative, in exchange for aligning myself with the government. That matters, because when elected representatives are quietly courted to change sides, when the balance of Parliament is being reshaped through backroom conversations, we are no longer operating in the spirit of the democratic mandate Canadians gave us. This is not just about me. It is about the people I represent. Kitchener Centre is not just any riding; it is Canada’s innovation capital. It is one of the most dynamic regions in the country, a hub for innovation, arts, culture and creativity. It is a place where start-ups are built, where entrepreneurs take risks and where the future of Canada’s economy is being shaped every single day. The people in my community understand systems, incentives and when something does not add up. When they see a government attempting to reshape Parliament, not through voters but through recruitment, they recognize it for what it is. I want to speak directly to them for a moment. They deserve transparency, accountability and a government that reflects the choices they made at the ballot box. Right now, what is being left out is scrutiny. Recruitment that deserves attention is not being covered. Patterns that raise questions are being dismissed. Democracy does not function on silence. It depends on transparency and on the willingness to ask the hard questions, even when the answers are uncomfortable. That brings us back to the motion before us. What we are seeing is a government that is not content with the mandate it was given, a government that is looking to expand its power not through democracy or the will of Canadians but through procedural control. That is the reality, and it raises a simple but important question. If the roles were reversed, would Conservatives reshuffle committees if we had a majority government? The answer is yes, but that is what Canadians would have voted for. However, we are missing one important question here. If we were elected in a minority Parliament, would we go against the voters, recruit members from other parties and manufacture a majority that Canadians never approved? The answer to that is no, because we believe the mandate given by Canadians matters. We believe the balance they choose should be respected. We believe accountability is not something to be avoided, but something to be upheld. This is bigger than one motion. It is about whether we accept a path where power is quietly consolidated, scrutiny and opposition are weakened and the voices of Canadians are overwritten. It is about whether we stand up and say that our democracy is worth protecting and that the choices Canadians make matter. Canadians are not asking for perfection from their government, but they are asking for honesty. They are asking for a system that reflects their vote, not one that works around it. When trust in that system starts to erode, it is not easily rebuilt. What we are debating today may seem procedural to some, but Canadians understand fairness when they see it, and they understand when something crosses the line. Changing the rules after the fact, reshaping Parliament to avoid scrutiny, is not fairness. It is a shift away from the very principles that hold this place together. If we allow that shift to go unchallenged, we set a precedent not just for the government but for everyone to follow. This moment matters. This is why we are speaking up and not backing down. No government, regardless of party, should be able to rewrite Canadians’ choices. Conservatives will continue to stand against this, to call it out and to uphold a Parliament that reflects the will of the people, not the ambitions of power. This country and the democracy that defines it are worth protecting.

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“The Prime Minister promised to lower the debt, but he has doubled it instead. His extra spending is hurting Canadian families. When will he stop spending so much money?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, he is right. From the Saskatchewan perspective, it has been a long 10 years. One year ago, this Prime Minister made big promises to Canadians, but the results tell a different story: more spending, more deficit and more pressure on Canadian families just trying to get by. He has more than doubled Trudeau’s debt while promising to reduce it at the exact same time. Why do this Prime Minister’s promises never match his results, and when will he rein in this spending?

Government Orders ·

Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing Orders

“The government says it respects democracy, but it is trying to change how committees are set up to give itself more control. Will the government keep the committees as voters chose them, so it stays accountable?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have heard the government House leader say multiple times today that the government wants to maintain the institutions that are in place and that it wants to respect democracy. I find it quite ironic that these words are even being used, considering that in over 150 years of Canadian Parliament, active recruitment to secure a majority has never happened in this place. Not listening to Canadian voters and not respecting a minority government has never happened in this place. My question for the government House leader is very simple: Will the government keep the makeup of committees as elected, as the Canadian voices elected them to be at the time of Parliament, instead of now trying to get a supermajority for itself to hide from accountability?