Marc Dalton

In response to a question from Yves Perron

“I oppose this bill. The government is avoiding its responsibilities, and we do not know how it plans to spend this money. Parliament must oversee and control all government spending.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his comments. I agree with him. I think this is yet another way for the government to shirk its responsibilities. We do not know what it intends to do about expenditures. Often, when we see other expenditures, such as those related to the green fund or other initiatives in which the Liberals’ friends are heavily involved, it becomes a serious problem. That is why we really want all of this to be carried out under the scrutiny and control of parliamentarians.”

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“The Liberals are spinning the numbers on military recruitment and spending. Just because people apply to the military does not mean they are accepted and trained. We are not paying to train them. The military is falling apart, and the Liberals are to blame.”

“Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot from this member. He seems to be the only person the Liberals put forward, and he is a fine doctor of spinning. With recruitment, the number of people who apply does not mean the number of additional personnel who have been accepted and trained. We need to train these people. We are not paying for a training budget. Everything is falling apart, and we can place that on the Liberals. The Liberals talk about the percentage. As I mentioned, a lot of what they are doing is budgetary hocus-pocus.”

In response to a question from Alex Ruff

“I oppose this bill. Our military has grown weaker under the Liberals because of cuts to training and equipment. Creating a new Crown corporation will not fix this. It will only hide military spending and contracts from Parliament's oversight.”

“Mr. Speaker, CFB Wainwright is no longer front and centre in the news, but many of our service personnel are still in a critical situation from injuries and burns. We also think of the four who lost their lives at this time. It is a reflection of the dangerous work that our military, the navy, the army and the air force do, whether in combat or during training exercises. Our thoughts and prayers are certainly with the families and friends of these four soldiers and those who knew them, as well as with the numerous personnel. This strikes close to home because I did my basic training at CFB Wainwright and was involved in other military exercises afterward. That was decades ago. I have lived a full life since then. I want to live longer, but it has been decades. These young men had their lives cut short, and as we approach Remembrance Day, we reflect on the tens of thousands of Canadians who died on the battlefield, who drowned in the North Atlantic after their ships were torpedoed and who suffered unimaginable horrors as prisoners of war in internment camps under the Japanese or as slave labourers. It was terrible. About a decade ago, my wife and I had the privilege of going to Normandy and visiting Juno Beach, where the first Canadian Army landed, and around town. If members have not had a chance to see it, I would encourage them to the site at some point in their life, and other places in France and throughout Europe, such as Vimy Ridge. There are pictures of Canadians moving throughout the town under the hail of machine gunfire. Hundreds were killed and wounded. Lest we forget. Canadians are peace-loving. We have a tradition of peacekeeping. My father served in the Royal Canadian Air Force for 36 years and was based across Canada, in Germany and with the United Nations peacekeeping forces in Ismailia, Egypt and the Golan Heights. Growing up in a military home and having served in the military, I can say the Canadian military has always been on my mind and in my heart. I remember growing up during the years that Pierre Elliott Trudeau was the Liberal prime minister of Canada. I know that those were difficult days for the Canadian military. There were numerous base closures. Our troop strength was slashed and in many ways crippled. We went from having the third- or fourth-largest navy and air force to now being way down on the list, and it is dropping. Our ranking, as far as our military capacity goes, is dropping year by year, it seems. Our overall ranking is now 28th in the world. Our air force is 30th. Our navy is 45th. It has steadily dropped under the Liberals. I am not talking about our personnel. They are excellent. They are dedicated, loyal and professional, and I think they are admired wherever they are. I am talking about how under the Liberals, we have seen an ongoing decline and erosion of our military capacity in spite of the increased dangers we are facing. I understand that after the iron curtain came down, there was a peace dividend and people thought there would be no more war, but things have changed. Humanity has not changed, though. We were not prepared for previous world wars. We were not prepared for the First World War or the Second World War. One cannot just be ready at the call of a bugle. It takes training. It takes equipment. It takes investment. It takes enough personnel, too, and enough training. As for the Liberals, we are hearing a lot of talk but seeing little concrete action. I did not say “no concrete action”, because they will point to this expenditure or that expenditure, like the building of a new bureaucracy. The Liberals are very crafty. They will say they are on track to meet NATO’s defence obligations, but a lot of it is a sleight of hand. For example, they have the Coast Guard now as part of their defence calculations, which was not there beforehand. There are other things that were never part of the defence calculations but now are. The percentage is going up, but actually, in reality, it is going down. As a matter of fact, it is not just staying the same; the investments we are seeing are going down. It is getting worse. I talk with service personnel. The training budget and operating budget have been slashed year after year. This year it was another 10%. The operating budget is already low. It is tough. The infantry, for example, needs to be able to shoot ammo, but a lot of times, even ammo is at a premium. It is really tough. As recently as 2024-25, 40% of maritime key fleets were not serviceable for training and operations, as well as 50% of key army vehicles and 57% of aircraft. Those figures are actually getting worse. We then have the retirement of the Snowbirds. They are part of the military. They are a symbol of Canada, a very important symbol. The Liberals said they were going to bring a replacement aircraft, that they were going to close this down and replace these jets in the 2030s, forgetting that they just modernized these aircraft in 2021 for $29 million. Modernizing the aircraft is not the reason. We are living in a dangerous world, and the Liberals are just traipsing along. Think of what is happening in the battlefields in Ukraine and Russia right now. We have to be much more nimble and ready for hostilities. The Conservatives believe in equipping our forces quickly but also in being sensitive to the Canadian taxpayers, who foot the bill. Under the Harper Conservatives, we bought 650 new LAVs, light armoured vehicles; 500 tactical armoured vehicles; and 100 Leopard tanks. The previous government, under Chrétien, was actually disposing of them. We bought two main battle tanks, 82 armoured heavy support vehicle systems, 50 Nyala armoured vehicles and 37 M777 howitzers. For the air force, we bought five brand new CC-177 tactical Globemasters so we can move equipment around. We bought 21 Chinook helicopters and 17 new CC-130J Hercules models. We upgraded our CF-188s and made the decision to buy the F-35. We got things done. We did not need another bureaucracy under the Defence Investment Agency, which has been in operation for 10 years and has not had any purchases, nothing. The Liberals now want to make it a Crown corporation that is at arm’s length. Well, that is fine. It is not at arm’s length, because under the terms, contrary to all other Crown agencies, it must do what the minister requires it to do. It has much less accountability to Parliament. It can move things around, have contracts and do sole-source contracts that are in its interest, not accountable to Parliament. This is a travesty.”

“I congratulate the newly elected members of the Quebec National Assembly. Can the member give more examples of the Liberals breaking their promises, and explain how those broken promises hurt Quebec?”

“Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate all the newly elected members of the Quebec National Assembly, including former members of the House of Commons, especially the Conservative members. It has been decades. I also thank the member for his comments. Can he give more examples of times when the Liberals failed to keep their promises? If so, what impact have these empty promises had on Quebec?”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 44 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 →

“Parents need good jobs so they can provide for their families. Young people cannot even find entry-level jobs like fast food anymore because businesses hire temporary foreign workers instead. I want the member to comment on this issue.”

“Mr. Speaker, parents want the ability to provide for their families. Yes, it is great to have school lunch programs, but the real issue is having good jobs. It is becoming more and more difficult to have a good job. Beyond that, having any job is difficult. I talk to young people, and they are having challenges getting work, even in fast food industries. Last week, I talked to one young lady in her early twenties. McDonald’s and other places used to be the place for young people to get experience and get a job, but they cannot find one because of temporary foreign workers in places where there are many people looking for jobs. I wonder if the member could comment on that.”

“The high cost of living is the biggest concern for Canadians, and things are getting worse. Liberal programs are not helping. I want the government to take responsibility for making life more expensive.”

“Mr. Speaker, the number one concern among Canadians, from British Columbia to Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, is the cost of living. That is the reason why the Conservative Party has brought in this motion about the affordability crisis. I was just appointed to the indigenous and northern affairs committee, which is hearing testimony from businesses, NGOs and others about the cost of living and the struggles they are having. It is getting very difficult. We asked if things are getting better and they said no. Things are getting worse. I appreciate all the programs the Liberals say they are bringing in, but they are putting Canada in a worse position. Will the member not recognize that and take responsibility for plunging Canada into this situation?”

“We passed a similar bill 18 months ago because the Prime Minister promised it would speed up projects. Instead, 500 projects are stalled. Will the member tell me if we will be back here debating another bill like this in 18 months?”

“Mr. Speaker, it is a bit discouraging to be having this debate now in the House of Commons. Why? It is because we already passed a similar bill barely 18 months ago. The Conservatives voted in favour of it because the Prime Minister said that those projects would be fast-tracked at unimaginable speeds. The result is that 500 projects are currently stalled. We are not seeing any progress at all. Can the member tell me whether we will see another bill like this one 18 months down the line?”

In response to a question from Grant Jackson

“Governments must work together without repeating each other's work. Conservatives want prosperity for all Canadians, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous. We need real action, not just the Liberals' endless paperwork.”

“Madam Speaker, yes, working together with the different levels of government and not duplicating is key, just to become effective. Conservatives believe in prosperity for all Canadians, indigenous and non-indigenous, and so we need to get things moving and not just paper shuffling, which is what the Liberals are great at doing.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 39 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 34 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 Mario Beaulieu

“I support creating this commissioner and office. The government must keep its treaty promises. But we should not have six different groups doing the same job.”

“Madam Speaker, I thank the Bloc member. I agree with him. I say yes to an office, a commissioner, but no to six different ways of doing the same thing. I think that is important. I fully agree that the government has a responsibility to fulfill its duty and do its job.”

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“I do not support this bill. Other agencies already do this work, and we do not need to create more bureaucracy. Ministers should report to Parliament directly and be held responsible when treaty obligations are not met.”

“Madam Speaker, certainly we support auditors general and different agencies, but we do not need half a dozen or a dozen agents doing the same exact work or with a slight modification. A key aspect is just to hold ministers accountable. Every minister should report to Parliament on treaty implementation. If an obligation is unfulfilled, this is not a bureaucratic problem. It is a leadership failure and there must be consequences. We need to reduce government. We need to reduce bureaucracy instead of expanding it.”

“I do not want this bill to pass. It creates another government office instead of actually fixing treaty problems. A new commissioner will not build houses, provide clean water, or make communities safer.”

“Madam Speaker, it has been an honour to serve the residents of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge and now Mission for going on seven years. I appreciate this role and take my responsibilities seriously. Today is the first day of a fall session. I was a teacher for many years prior to being elected, and September is the start of a new school year, not only in elementary and high schools but also on campuses, with new sports programs, dance classes and many other activities. There is a sense of excitement among many students at the beginning of something new and getting involved. I want to wish students and teachers a successful and fulfilling year. I have a confession to make. As we enter this fall session, I do not have the same excitement. As a matter of fact, I have a bit of a heavy heart over what has been happening in our beautiful country of Canada for the past years under the Liberal government and, I would also add, in my province of British Columbia under the NDP government. Millions of Canadians are struggling to make ends meet. They are feeling the cost of living squeeze at the grocery stores and gas pumps. Small business owners tell me they feel that the government is, in many respects, warring against them to make them unprofitable and increase regulatory and tax burdens. Canada has dropped like a rock in our ranking in per capita income compared to the rest of the world. I will not talk about crime in our communities or drugs on the streets. However, I must give credit to the Liberals where credit is due. They are master illusionists. Has anyone ever seen a magician saw an attractive assistant in two, only for the assistant to appear whole, with the wave of a wand and the swoosh of a cape? How do magicians do it? It is a little easier now with AI to find out their secrets. The Liberals are masters of illusion. They give the appearance of doing things, tricking our eyes and minds, but it is an illusion. One and a half years ago, the Prime Minister talked about moving Canada forward at unimaginable speed on major infrastructure and economic projects and about the need to rapidly diversify. Things have been pretty stagnant on that front. They may be able to point to one or two different projects, but it has been very sluggish. They said lots of good-sounding words and talked about doubling housing that is going the wrong direction. I asked my parliamentary assistant how many new bureaucracies and offices the Liberals have they formed since they have been in government, and he sent me a list. It came to almost 50. There are 48 announced to be funded and formed, layers and layers of bureaucracies weighing down taxpayers with more debt, more regulations, more paper shuffling and more delays. Therefore, when the Liberal government tells me that Bill C-10 will fix its relationship with indigenous peoples by adding a new bureaucracy, I have to ask a simple question: With what? When we open the box, there is nothing inside. We have tried this before. As I asked in my question to the parliamentary secretary moments ago, between 2015 and 2017, the government created the modern treaty implementation office, the assessment of modern treaty implementation office, the performance management framework, the modern treaty management environment, the deputy minister’s oversight committee and the reconciliation secretariat, six separate entities specifically designed to monitor, support and ensure treaty implementation. At this rate, I have to ask: How many government offices does it take to change a light bulb? Apparently, it is six, or I guess seven now. After six offices and committees and layers of bureaucracy, the light bulb is still out. It is a bureaucracy and a government that have run amok. In 2024, the Auditor General again reported that the federal system remains fragmented, bureaucratic and unaccountable. Responsibility is scattered across Indigenous Services Canada, Crown-Indigenous Relations, Justice Canada and the Treasury Board. When commitments go unfulfilled, no one is accountable, not politically, not financially, not morally. It is like it is their fault. Adding a commissioner does not change culture or performance. Only enforcement, accountability and clear expectations can. The government’s response is what we have in the bill, to create yet another agency to monitor implementation. Success should not be measured in bureaucratic reports. It should be measured in results on the ground, homes, water, policing, infrastructure, governance and economic opportunities. A commissioner will not build a house. A commissioner will not hire a police officer. A commissioner will not deliver clean water. The Liberal philosophy is that Ottawa always knows best, that Ottawa must monitor, that Ottawa must supervise. The Liberals want to teach from above instead of supporting from beside. Bill C-10 is the purest expression of that instinct. Indigenous communities do not need a commissioner. The government needs a mirror. Its record is damning. The government has had 11 years to act. In that time, how many new modern treaties has it delivered? The answer is zero. That is a fact. In contrast, the Conservative government, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, without all these extra bureaucracies, produced five modern treaties in six years. This is not a question of capacity or goodwill. It can be done and it has to be done. The government knows it has failed indigenous people, and it knows that the Auditor General has told it so, not once, not twice, but repeatedly. There is the 2005 report on treaty land entitlements, the 2006 report on the B.C. treaty process, the 2013 audit of modern treaty implementation, the 2016 report on the Labrador and Inuit Land Claims Agreement. There have been more than 14 reports since 2015, covering housing, clean water and treaty implementation, more than two decades of road maps. Instead of following the map, the government got lost in its own maze of offices, titles and press conferences. While it wandered in the wilderness, communities have suffered. Treaty rights have not been honoured. Fiscal transfers have been delayed. Infrastructure has crumbled. Policing was underfunded and housing has been inadequate. In 2023, the government even proposed a collaborative modern treaty implementation policy. That sounded like progress, especially with 70 treaty negotiations bogged down. Two years later, nothing has been implemented. We do not need another report telling us that the government has failed. We already know that. I ask the House how a future commissioner of modern treaty implementation would magically motivate the government to finish the work. It would not. The problem has never been a lack of oversight. The problem is a lack of execution, a lack of political will and a lack of ministerial accountability. There are some alternatives. I will maybe get to that in my responses to some questions. I will say that we already have the courts. We have the Auditor General. We already have parliamentary committees, deputy ministers, performance frameworks and internal audits. The government does not need another reminder that it is failing to do its job. Over 100,000 public servants have been added since 2015, with $20 billion a year spent on external consultants. We have a public service that is larger than ever, a public service more ineffective in every respect. Faced with that failure, the Liberal answer is always the same, one more office, just one more commissioner and just one more structure. Actually, it is not just one more. The Liberals are going a dime a dozen. It is the illusion of action.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “The assessment of modern treaty implementation office.”

  Said 3 times by 2 members since September 21.

  Every time it was said →

“This bill just creates more government waste. Six different government groups already monitor treaty implementation. I want the member to explain why we need another commissioner to do the exact same job.”

“Madam Speaker, I hardly agree with the parliamentary secretary about this being good from an economic perspective, but I guess it is good from the economic perspective of bureaucrats and bloated government. I wonder if he is aware of the six separate entities specifically designed to monitor, support and ensure treaty implementation. He can nod if he knows these ones: the modern treaty implementation office, the assessment of modern treaty implications office, the performance management framework, the modern treaty management environment, the deputy ministers’ oversight committee and the reconciliation secretariat. I am wondering if the member could elaborate on these other aspects that are about doing the same job.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “The assessment of modern treaty implementation office.”

  Said 3 times by 2 members since September 21.

  Every time it was said →