MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Sandra Cobena

Follow by RSS

Cobena presses the government on the federal books and affordability — challenging $94 billion in operating expenses relabelled as investments, debt hidden in Crown corporations and the $733-billion borrowing plan — and argues that young Canadians cannot land a first job or a home, backing the blue seal program and youth advisory councils while sponsoring Bill C-270, which adds self-defence presumptions to the Criminal Code. She argues with household and business analogies — calling the relabelled spending “like calling a grocery bill an investment” — and leans on constituents’ stories, often prefacing a point with “the reality is”.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
A–
87 / 100 over 81 statements
Signal 77 / 100
Relevance 80 / 100
Respect 99 / 100
Clarity 94 / 100
Loses points more than most for Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.1.9 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×1.9 Loses points less than most for A remark off to the side of the point.Less often than most members.What the tags mean Thanks and tributes.Less often than most members.What the tags mean A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.Less often than most members.What the tags mean Averaged over the 81 of 86 statements graded so far.

Statements 86

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“The Liberal government is spending too much money. It added $700 billion to our debt over the last 10 years, and it plans to add another $733 billion over the next five. That adds $82,000 of debt for every household. Meanwhile, food bank visits have hit a record high. All this spending is making Canadians poorer, not better off.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the Liberal government is spending without restraint. It has added $700 billion in national debt over the last 10 years, but it is adding another $733 billion over the next five. The Liberals are costing us an additional $82,000 of debt per Canadian household. What is the outcome? It is a record 2.4 million visits to the food bank in a single month. That is the highest in Canadian history. If spending was the solution, surely Canadians would be better off by now. What good is all this spending when the very Canadians paying for it are getting poorer?

Statements by Members ·

Patrick Beatty

“I am honouring my friend Patrick Beatty, who died in a car accident on September 23. He was a dedicated Conservative activist who supported organ donation. I share my deep condolences with his family and hope his wife fully recovers from her injuries.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to honour the life of my dear friend Patrick Beatty. Patrick unexpectedly passed in a car accident on September 23. His wife, Nabiha, was also seriously injured and is now recovering. My husband and I had the privilege of knowing Patrick and attending university with him. We shared many moments, the kind filled with laughter. Patrick knew exactly how to make sure everyone had a good time. Patrick was a long-time Conservative activist inspired by his father’s dedication to public service. He loved Canada and was a strong advocate for organ donation. Having already endured the unimaginable loss of their first son nearly 20 years ago, my heart breaks knowing that his parents must now endure that pain again with the loss of Patrick. To Nabiha and the entire Beatty family, our political family mourns with them. We pray for Nabiha’s full recovery, and may the memories that Patrick gave us remain with us forever. Rest in peace, my dear friend.

Statements by Members ·

Latin America Heritage Month

“It is Latin American Heritage Month. My family came here from Ecuador, and I am grateful to be Canadian. We must protect the Canadian dream so hard work is rewarded and our children have better lives.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, for many Latino families, the heart of the home is around grandma’s kitchen table. It is where generations gather, stories are told, recipes are passed down and our traditions live on. Our heritage is found in the warm embrace of our abuela, in the faith of our parents and in the love of family. Like so many, my family left behind the people, places and language we loved for the extraordinary privilege of becoming Canadian and calling Canada our home. Whether our roots are Mexican, Colombian, or Ecuadorian like mine, we remember where we come from and are profoundly grateful for being Canadian. However, gratitude carries a responsibility, we must fight to preserve the Canadian dream that hard work is rewarded, sacrifice means something and our children can build a better life than the one we had. That is the promise that brought us here, and it is a promise that we must pass on. Feliz Mes de la Herencia latinoamericana.

Oral Questions ·

The Economy

“The government's plans are not working. Canadians visit food banks 2.4 million times a month, and one-third of those visits are for children. The government should measure success by how many people no longer need help. I want the government to explain why hard work is no longer enough to support a family.”
  • A repeated line

    “After 11 years of the Liberal government.”

    Said 25 times by 19 members since April 30.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member says that they are working, but the reality is that whatever they are doing is, in fact, not working, not when there are 2.4 million visits to a food bank in a single month and one in three of them is for children. I would encourage the member to stop measuring success by how many Canadians need government assistance, and start measuring by how many no longer do. Therefore I ask again, why, after 11 years of the Liberal government, honest hard work is no longer enough to provide for one’s family.

“A record 2.4 million people visited food banks in one month, and a third of them were children. Canadians are working hard but falling behind. I want the Prime Minister to explain why working hard is no longer enough to support a family.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there are 2.4 million food bank visits in a single month. That is the highest ever recorded in this country, and one in three is for a child. What greater failure of a government’s economic record is there than that a parent who works all day still cannot provide for their children? After more than a year and a half under the Liberal Prime Minister, Canadians are working harder but falling further behind. Will the Prime Minister explain why, in a country such as Canada, honest work is no longer enough to provide for one’s family?

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“The Liberals will not admit that life is too expensive for people right now. Canadians do not just want government programs. They want the government to stop overspending and get out of the way so they can provide for themselves.”
  • 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, there have been two questions from the Liberal benches and not once have the Liberals recognized that there is an affordability crisis, which is at the heart of the problem today. The Liberals can get up and list all of the government programs, but what Canadians are saying, which the Liberals refuse to listen to after sharing hundreds of stories from Canadians, is they want to be able to provide for themselves. They want the government to get out of the way and stop the overspending so that they can provide for themselves and get ahead, and the Liberals are refusing to recognize that.

In response to a question from Jeremy Patzer

“Canadians have real bills to pay and face an affordability crisis. The Prime Minister hides government spending by calling it an investment instead of debt. I want the government to admit that life has become too expensive for Canadians.”
  • 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, I share those thoughts. We are talking about an affordability crisis. The funny thing is that the country is in a massive deficit, but the Prime Minister has changed accounting definitions so that he can take a marker, cross off those expenses and label them as investments. Canadians do not have that luxury. Unfortunately, under the Liberal government, that luxury is reserved for the Liberal government only. Meanwhile, Canadians have real bills to pay and they cannot make them disappear. This is an affordability crisis, and the Liberal government is refusing to recognize that.

In response to a question from Mark Gerretsen

“The Liberals want families to rely on government programs for a problem the Liberals caused. Canadians do not want to depend on the government. They want to be able to provide for themselves.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 45 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 7 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, I think the member is missing the point. I wish the Liberals would listen. The member, again, is saying to these families they should be happy they have this government program to depend on. He is not saying the government wants them to provide for themselves, it wants their hard work to mean something and it wants them to get back on their own two feet. He and the Liberals are telling them to be happy they depend on the government and to be happy the Liberals are there to fix a problem that they themselves created. Canadians want the dignity to provide for themselves.

“I want the House to vote for this motion. It says two simple facts: the Liberals have been in power for 11 years, and life in Canada has become too expensive. People in my riding work hard, but they cannot afford food, rent, and mortgages. The government must admit this crisis exists and fix it.”
  • A repeated line

    “Canada is officially in an affordability crisis.”

    Said 8 times by 7 members since October 8.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montmorency—Charlevoix. The Liberals have been in power for 11 years. Canadians are living through an affordability crisis and they deserve a government that acknowledges it. Whenever we stand up for Canadians who cannot afford their groceries or rent, the Liberals respond with a laundry list of programs. They tell us how much money they have announced, how many benefits they have created and how many Canadians are receiving this government assistance, but we have to stop and think. When the government will stop measuring success by how many Canadians need government assistance and start measuring it by how many no longer do? Canadians want to get ahead. They want their hard work to mean something. They want to pay their bills and have something left to build a future. In Newmarket—Aurora, I hear from people who work hard and manage their money carefully. They budget, but they still cannot make ends meet. These Canadians are doing their part and asking why, after 11 years, the Liberal government is not doing its part. I take particular pride in hearing from my constituents, not only at the doors, but through their responses to mailers, in emails, phone calls and text messages, and even when they stop me at events. I would like to take a moment to share their stories and concerns here today. Patricia from Newmarket wrote to me and said Canadian salaries do not rise to meet the cost of living. She rarely buys beef and eats as economically as possible. She is already shopping carefully and choosing less food and less expensive food. How much more is she supposed to cut? In the same light, Canadians have told me they pay taxes at every turn. They pay tax when they earn a paycheque, own something, buy something, fill the tank in their car and buy a drink, and they may even pay tax when they die, yet the Liberal government still cannot balance the budget. How much more does the government want from them? They are living within their means and do not understand why the Liberal government cannot live within its means. I have another story that I would like to share. Mary Jane from Newmarket wrote to say she and her family and are struggling with rent costs and the price of food. The most recent statistic is that the bottom quartile of Canadians are spending 110% of their income on just shelter and basic necessities. These Canadians will not be able to get ahead. This short message from Mary Jane tells this House everything it needs to know. This is a family struggling with the costs of shelter and food. These are the basics. They are the things a household needs before it can even think about anything else. That is why our opposition motion today asks this House to recognize exactly what Canadians are living. It is quite simple. It says: (a) the Liberals have been in power for 11 years; and (b) Canada is in an affordability crisis. There are two lines and two simple facts. Members do not have to agree on every policy to acknowledge that Canadians are struggling and that families cannot afford the essentials, but if the Liberal government cannot even acknowledge the problem, how can we expect it to fix it? The government must stop gaslighting Canadians and listen to them instead. These are their cries. There are endless stories of what Canadians are living through, and they must be at the heart of the decisions the Liberal government makes. Joanna from Newmarket wrote to say she and her partner are struggling to stay afloat with their son in university, their mortgage and working overtime. They are both in their late fifties now and these are bad times. Two Canadians are working overtime and struggling to pay their mortgage because they are helping their child through university. Why has it become so difficult to stay afloat? These are people who have spent years working and contributing. They should be able to look ahead with some confidence. Instead, they are working more just to keep up. A line I hear time and time again from Canadians is, “We are the working poor.” When a family works overtime and still cannot get ahead, the Liberal government should be asking some questions. What is making their life so expensive? How can we change that? What costs can we remove? What barriers can we reduce? What can we do to help their paycheques go further? Instead, we get another spending announcement with very little implementation and another laundry list of government programs. Canadians keep making sacrifices. How much more can they really sacrifice when families are already struggling to cover rent and groceries? That is not normal. The Liberal government is asking them to be impressed by more announcements and more spending, but announcements do not pay Joanna’s mortgage, for example. Their talking points do not put groceries in Mary Jane’s kitchen. We should judge the results by what Canadians can actually afford. Can they pay their rent? The answer is no. Can they buy groceries? They are cutting back. Can they save for an emergency? They cannot when the basics take 110% of what they make. Can they finish the month without taking on more debt? No. An MNP report this week confirmed that 44% of Canadians are just $200 away from insolvency. Newmarket Today reported that York region food pantries have seen a rise of 57% since 2020 and that one in three who attend are children. There is a whole generation of children who are now watching their parents not have the dignity to provide for them. That is a failure. Today, every member in this House has an opportunity to acknowledge what Canadians are telling us every day. Recognize that the Liberals have been in power for 11 years and recognize that Canada is in an affordability crisis. Canadians already know it because they are living it. Let us listen to these families. Canadians are doing their part. It is time for the government to do its part so that a hard-earned paycheque can once again pay the bills.

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“The government is using made-up financial rules to make the budget look balanced. I want the government to cancel this accounting plan and go back to using normal rules.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that if a CEO invented new financial definitions that were used nowhere else in the world and then applied them inconsistently, shareholders would wonder if he did not know how to budget or if he was trying to manipulate the budget. The Prime Minister stood in front of international investors and said that he would balance the operating budget a year early, but he is using invented definitions used nowhere else in the world, and on top of that, they are being used inconsistently. Will the Liberal government restore our original financial definitions and scrap this fake accounting scheme?

“The Prime Minister renamed $94 billion in regular expenses as investments to make government spending look better. Independent budget watchdogs have called out this practice. I want the government to explain why it is misleading Canadians about our country's finances.”
  • Opposition question in Question Period

    Respect 69 of 100

    This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “he took advantage of that trust”.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister sold Canadians on his financial credentials, and then when they were not looking, he took advantage of that trust by inventing financial definitions used nowhere else in the world. He relabelled $94 billion of expenses as investments. This is like calling a grocery bill an investment. The former PBO and the IMF called them out, and now the new PBO has gone even further by saying that these invented definitions are not even being applied consistently. Why is this Liberal government destroying the integrity of Canada’s books?

Statements by Members ·

Government Accounting

“The government is using made-up accounting rules to make Canada's finances look better. They relabelled $94 billion of regular spending as investments, and experts say these rules are inconsistent and not used anywhere else. I want the government to scrap this accounting scheme.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, if a CEO took control of a company and invented new financial definitions to make the books look better, shareholders would have questions, but if he could not even apply those definitions consistently, they would ask if he even understood his own definitions. This is exactly what is happening with Canada’s finances. The Prime Minister invented new definitions used nowhere else in the world. The PBO said that he relabelled $94 billion of operating expenses as investments. The IMF has called for greater alignment with international standards and independent verification. The new PBO says that classifications cannot be independently replicated and are being used inconsistently. In the financial world, this is completely unacceptable. I call on the Liberal government to scrap this fake accounting scheme.

Private Members' Business ·

Protecting Young Persons from Exposure to Pornography Act

“I want the House to pass this bill. It requires commercial pornography websites to check that users are adults, just like stores do for alcohol and cannabis. Early exposure harms children, and the companies profiting from this content should be responsible for keeping them off it.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there should be some things in this House that rise above politics, and protecting our children is one of them. That is why Bill S-209 has earned support from across party lines and across political traditions. Whether we sit on the government benches or the opposition benches, or whether we are Conservative, Liberal, NDP, Bloc or independent, surely we can agree on something this basic: A child should not be one click away from pornography. I am pleased to rise today in support of Bill S-209. I would like to thank Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne for bringing this bill forward once again and for the many years of work she has poured into it. This bill would require commercial pornography websites to take meaningful steps to prevent children from accessing their content. As a mother, I find it deeply troubling that it is 2026, and we still have to debate whether those safeguards should exist. We would never accept a 10-year-old walking into a liquor store and being told, “We trust you to make choices on your own because you’re old enough.” We would never accept a child walking into a casino without checking their age. However, today, a child can pick up a phone, click a link and enter a commercial pornography website. That makes no sense and parents know it. As a mother, I think about the moment when our children begin exploring the world on their own. They ask questions. They become curious. They start using a phone or a tablet to look something up, watch a video or talk to a friend. As parents, we want to give them the room to learn and grow, but we also need reasonable safeguards while they do. Right now, a child can encounter pornography without even looking for it. A link can appear in a group chat, a search can land somewhere unexpected or something can appear on the screen before a child can even understand what they are seeing. Once a child sees it, parents cannot make them unsee it. Of course, we all know that once a child has lost their innocence, it cannot be gained back. That alone is a main concern. However, this issue goes beyond accidental exposure. As children grow, they naturally begin asking questions about themselves, relationships and the world around them. That curiosity is part of growing up. The problem is that today, a commercial pornography website can only be one click away, often without a meaningful check that the person entering is actually an adult. What might a child find there? They may see violence or degradation. They may see women and girls treated as though their wishes do not matter. Without the maturity to understand what they are watching, they may begin to mistake pornography for an education in relationships. Those are lessons no child should be learning from a pornographic website. Research puts the average age of the first exposure at 12. One-third of children are exposed by the age of 10 years old. At 10, many children are still learning how to understand their own feelings, let alone how to interpret explicit material created for adults. Research has associated young people’s exposure to pornography with harmful beliefs about relationships, including beliefs concerning consent and the treatment of women and girls. The bill recognizes concerns about material depicting violence, reinforcing gender stereotypes and contributing to attitudes favourable to harassment and violence. There are legitimate concerns about children’s development and safety, because children are still developing their understanding of relationships, boundaries and behaviour. Repeated exposure to pornography can shape what a young person begins to see as normal and expected, and that has real consequences for how they understand themselves and others. What does commercial pornography teach children about consent, dignity and respect? Those are questions that matter to parents raising their children, and they matter to the society those children will inherit. Parents are already doing everything they can to help their children navigate these issues with care and with honesty, but no parent can watch every screen, every search result, every message and every link every minute of the day. Children can use the Internet at home, at school and with their friends, so yes, we should give parents the tool, but we should also expect the companies making money from this content to take responsibility. The principle behind Bill S-209 is simple: If someone makes money selling adult content, they have a responsibility to make a reasonable effort to ensure that the person accessing it is actually an adult. That should not be controversial. We already accept that principle in the physical world. We place age restrictions on alcohol, cannabis and gambling. We do not tell parents that it is entirely their responsibility; we require the business to check. Why should the online world be any different? Children deserve better, and we owe them better. They deserve the freedom to be curious and to discover the world without being confronted with explicit material they are simply too young to understand. Protecting childhood is part of our responsibility as adults, as parents and as legislators. Bill S-209 would give that responsibility practical meaning. It would make it an offence for an organization to make pornographic material available online for commercial purposes to a person under 18 years of age. A company could not simply say that it is assumed that a visitor was an adult. It would have to demonstrate it used an approved method of determining age. The bill would also establish significant fines for companies that fail to take that responsibility seriously. We know that many of these websites operate outside Canada, but the fact that a company is somewhere else in the world does not make its content any less accessible to a child sitting in a bedroom in Newmarket, Aurora or anywhere else in this country. That is why the bill would provide an enforcement process where, after notice and continued non-compliance, the enforcement authority could seek a federal court order requiring Internet service providers to prevent access to the material in Canada. Ultimately, a court would make that decision. The principle remains the same, though: Responsibility belongs to the organizations commercially distributing the pornography. If they profit from providing adult content, they must take meaningful steps to keep children from accessing it. Some people have raised legitimate concerns about privacy, and those concerns deserve to be taken seriously. Bill S-209 would take them seriously. Approved methods would have to meet privacy requirements, including limiting the collection of personal information, using information for age-assurance purposes and destroying information once the process is complete. Canada’s Privacy Commissioner, Philippe Dufresne, has supported the objective of Bill S-209 and has said that privacy-protective age assurance can be an appropriate tool for creating safer online experiences for children. We do not have to choose between protecting privacy and protecting children from pornography. We can and should do both. No law can guarantee that a child will never encounter pornography online. Children are resourceful, and technology changes, but the fact that we cannot prevent every exposure is no excuse for preventing none. Age restrictions do not prevent every underage person from obtaining alcohol. We still require them, because safeguards matter, accountability matters and making it harder for children to access something intended for adults matters. For me as a mother, this is where the issue becomes very simple. We cannot keep our children little forever, nor should we. They will grow, and they will ask questions, and part of being a parent is answering those questions honestly and helping our children understand the world they are entering. However, children deserve the opportunity to learn about relationships, consent, dignity and respect from the people who love them and care about the adults they will become. Parents are doing their part every day. Let us give our children the time and space to simply be children.

Oral Questions ·

The Economy

“The Liberals are hurting our economy. We are in a trade war, but the government's trade projects are years or decades away. I want the government to stop making announcements and actually finish these projects.”
  • A repeated line

    “The Liberal government is all talk, no results.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since September 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that the Liberals are driving the economy down. The Prime Minister himself said that we are in a trade war, but the projects we need to fight it are years, if not decades, away. The port of Churchill has no firm completion date. Gull Island hydro is 2037. Major LNG projects are into the 2030s. The Vancouver port expansion is years away. We cannot fight a trade war with business-as-usual timelines. The Liberal government is all talk and no results. When will it stop the announcements and start delivering?

“Canada's economy is falling behind other rich countries, and people in my community cannot afford places to live. The government's plans are not working. I want the government to use the Conservative economic plan instead.”
  • 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, the world is moving forward, but Canada is getting stuck. The OECD has cut Canada’s growth forecast by 25%. Only Canada and France were downgraded, while the rest of the G7 went up, and Canadians feel that failure. A lady in my community lives in her car and goes to the gym only to take a shower. The Liberals are all talk and no results. The Liberal government announces with urgency but delivers at a crawl. When will the Liberals adopt our Conservative economic action plan so Canadians can afford to live again?

Oral Questions ·

Housing

“The government makes big announcements about housing, but takes too long to pass the laws to deliver them. This delays construction and leaves people without jobs. I want the government to stop just making announcements and start getting things done.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this is how out of touch the Liberals are. Romeo is looking for a full-time job, not to line up for programs. In May 2025, the government announced a GST rebate, but for nearly 10 months, it failed to pass the legislation. In the meantime, builders and buyers were left in limbo. The Canadian Home Builders’ Association says construction suffered. This has become a pattern. The Liberals make a grand announcement and maybe deliver later, and in the meantime, families are left without work. Canadians are tired of all the talk with no results. When will the Liberals stop governing by announcements and start delivering—

“Not enough homes are being built, so manufacturing workers are losing hours and cannot afford their bills. I want the government to keep its promise and get homes built so these people can work full-time again.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Romeo, a man in Aurora, has worked at a window manufacturer for over 30 years. He used to work overtime, in fact. Now he is down to two days a week. Homes are just not being built. He called me worried about his mortgage, his groceries and how he is going to provide for his family. He has heard all the announcements, but he cannot pay his mortgage with the announcements. He is tired of talk with no results. He needs work. When will the Liberal government finally keep its promise and get homes built so parents like him can get back to a full week’s work?

Oral Questions ·

Rail Transportation

“The Alto rail project will cost $90 billion and carry very few passengers. That is three times the cost of earlier transit plans for far fewer riders. The government should cancel this project and use our economic plan instead.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government is spending more than any government in Canadian history. That is what Canadians will remember. Alto, for example, is three times the cost for 2% of the daily passengers. The Liberals want to spend $90 billion on the Alto project, which, in 30 years, will maybe carry 66,000 passengers a year. Compare that to the last decade. Ottawa committed $30 billion to serve millions every day. This is three times the cost and 2% of the daily users. Will the government cancel the wasteful project, save Canadians money and adopt the Conservative economic action plan?

Oral Questions ·

Taxation

“Canadians pay too much tax on almost everything they do and buy. The government spends money that workers earned. Conservatives found 150 billion dollars to cut. The government needs to stop spending so much, fire outside consultants, and use our plan.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are taxed at every turn. They are taxed when they earn a paycheque, when they spend money, when they own something, when they fill their tank and when they buy a drink. Even when they die, they are taxed. Every single dollar that the Liberal government spends was first earned by a hard-working Canadian, yet Conservatives have found $150 billion in savings. When will the Liberal government respect taxpayers, cut consultants, rein in spending, save Canadians money and adopt the Conservative economic action plan?

Statements by Members ·

100th Birthday Congratulations

“I want to wish World War II veteran Jeffrey Reynolds a happy 100th birthday.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, 100 years is a century of memories, service and stories. In Newmarket—Aurora, we are preparing to celebrate a very special milestone as our friend and local Second World War veteran Mr. Jeffrey Reynolds turns 100 years old on June 29. At just 18 years old, he enlisted in the North Staffordshire Regiment, joining a generation that answered the call when freedom itself was under threat. Like so many who served, Jeff rarely speaks about his sacrifices. Instead, he is full of stories of growing up as a young boy, stories that remind us how much the world has changed over the last century and stories that connect us to a generation whose sacrifices shaped the country we know today. Turning 100 years old is an extraordinary achievement, but it also carries even greater meaning when that life was dedicated to serving others before it had fully begun. I ask all members of the House to join me in wishing Jeffrey Reynolds a very happy 100th birthday.