“I do not support this budget. It gives massive tax breaks to big corporations while doing almost nothing to lower the cost of living for regular people. It fails to tax the richest Canadians, does not build nearly enough affordable homes, and ignores our need for better health care. The government is choosing to help CEOs instead of working families.”

“Mr. Speaker, there were high expectations for this budget, but unfortunately, it misses the mark. This budget benefits the wealthy at the expense of the working class in this country. The Prime Minister talks about the masters of our destiny, but who are they? They are the billionaires and corporate executives he invited to his exclusive investment summit. When we look at this budget, it is clear whose interests come first. Christmas came early for CEOs, foreign investors and arms dealers in this budget. The single biggest item Santa Claus is bringing is a $36-billion mega deduction, over five years for big corporations, more than all the affordability measures that he purports to champion for everyday people. Where is the mega deduction on grocery bills for everyday Canadians? Where is it on their rent? Where is it on their cellphone bill? The government talks a lot about affordability, but this budget does very little to bring down the cost of living for everyday people. Instead, it doubles down on the familiar promise that if we give enough money to the biggest corporations and investors, somehow everyone will benefit. Canadians have heard that promise before. It has not solved the affordability crisis. The government will say that it is spending $4 billion on a one-time increase to the Canada groceries and essentials benefit, which is a fraction compared to the $36-billion mega deduction for corporations. For a single person, that amounts to $267 a year, roughly $20 a month. That money will quickly be swallowed up by rising food prices. It is a temporary measure that does nothing to address the underlying causes of the grocery crisis. One in three Canadians is skipping meals. Food bank use is at a record high. The government has no plan to confront the market concentration and pricing power of Canada’s major grocery chains. The NDP has proposed real solutions: a network of public grocery stores to introduce competition and bring down prices, and a ban on surveillance pricing so corporations cannot use people’s personal data to charge them more. We need to tackle the problems at their source, not simply give people a temporary payment while the big grocery chains continue to profit. On housing, the government has announced that it will end homelessness and expand non-market housing. I love that. On the face of it, it sounds like good news. To end homelessness, Canada needs deeply affordable non-market housing. Experts say that Canada needs at least 200,000 net new non-market homes per year for three decades. Budget 2026 is proposing to deliver 24,000 non-market homes for 10 years. That is just on capital investment. On supportive and operating costs, at least $5.7 billion per year is needed. This plan is entirely dependent on the provinces and territories, which are expected to pay for ongoing operations and wraparound services, including health care and mental health and addiction supports. A building without the necessary operating funding for deep core and support services is not a solution to homelessness. The housing minister would know this better than anyone else. He promised to end homelessness in Vancouver when he was the mayor of Vancouver. Instead of delivering on that promise, homelessness grew under his watch. He blamed the federal and provincial governments for failing to provide the funding at the scale necessary. Since the federal government is not stepping up with operating costs under budget 2026, my question is this: Has the Minister of Housing secured the operating and wraparound funding from the provinces and territories to deliver on the Prime Minister’s promise to end homelessness? If not, this will become just another broken promise. On another metric, the government admitted that Canada failed to build enough non-profit housing. We need to build a million non-profit homes to make a dent in the housing crisis, yet the commitments under budget 2026 are not even one-quarter of that ambition, nowhere near the postwar housing program the Prime Minister promised during the election campaign. I will say this. The budget is not all bad news. The renewal funding for Reaching Home and the Canada housing benefit is good news and something I strongly advocated for. Let me turn to another issue. While the government finds billions for corporate tax breaks and military spending, the cupboards are bare when it comes to essential public services. There is no new investment in child care. There is no increase to the Canada health transfer. The NDP called for an escalator of at least 6% to help the provinces and territories meet growing health care needs. Pharmacare is not even mentioned once in this 511-page budget. People cannot find family doctors. They wait months for treatment. They pay out of pocket for medication. Rather than strengthen the public services Canadians depend on, the government is allowing them to erode. Meanwhile, one in five federal dollars is going to military spending, rising to one in four by 2030. Canadians deserve to know why there is so much money for weapons and war, but so little for the services that help people live with dignity. This budget also lays out the groundwork for the privatization of Canada’s airports, with $37.6 million allocated to prepare for that process and the expected legislation. Canadians should be very concerned. YVR is one of the best airports in the world. Privatization can mean higher costs for travellers, pressure to cut jobs and working conditions, and public assets being turned into opportunities for private investors to extract profits. Our airports are essential infrastructure. The Prime Minister does not have the mandate to privatize them. They should serve the public interest, not become another vehicle for private wealth accumulation. There is another glaring omission in this budget. There is nothing meaningful to ask the wealthiest Canadians and largest corporations to pay their fair share. Canada’s 40 billionaires increased their collective wealth by $95 billion in 2024-25, a 20% increase, yet this budget offers no new wealth tax and no serious new revenue measures targeting those with the greatest ability to pay. The NDP has called for a wealth tax on very rich Canadians, and that could generate up to $40 billion a year. Think about that. Instead of giving corporations a $36-billion annual mega deduction, we could be asking those who have accumulated extraordinary wealth to contribute more to the country that helped make that wealth possible. Public money should come with public interest conditions, good union jobs, Canadian investment, accountability and a fair return to Canadians. We should be investing in productive infrastructure, in public services and in things that make life better, not simply hoping that corporate tax breaks will trickle down. On climate, the government’s priorities are equally difficult to reconcile. There is approximately $4 billion over 10 years for clean electricity, compared to $55 billion in public financing and investment for a pipeline. Bill C-39 attacks the environment and indigenous and labour rights. We cannot claim to be building a clean energy future while continuing to put enormous public resources behind fossil fuel infrastructure. The Prime Minister is driving up emissions, the same person who used to be the UN special envoy for climate and finance. Canada needs investment in renewable energy, a modern electricity grid and a just transition that puts workers and communities at the centre. The Prime Minister tells us that the masters of our destiny are those who will build Canada’s future, but the masters of our destinies in this budget are not Canadians and their families. They are the CEOs, billionaire and investors invited to the Prime Minister’s investment summit. Brookfield, BlackRock and the big banks will be happy, but Canadians deserve a budget that puts the affordability crisis for families first. Lastly, let me turn to immigration for a brief moment. The government has committed to transitioning 100,000 temporary residents to permanent status, and it is about time. That transition is welcome, and I hope it is only the first step in regularization. I also want to note that outside of the budget, there is a one-time addition to the levels plan of 100,000 PR spots, which will include humanitarian applications for Hong Kong lifeboat people and Ukrainians. I have stood with them to fight for this from day one, and this announcement shows what happens when impacted communities and allies come together to demand fairness. That is justice. That is fairness.”

• Echo ×4

  A repeated line

  “The Salvation Army reports one in three Canadians is skipping meals because they cannot afford groceries.”

  Said 4 times by 4 members since November 3.

  Every time it was said →

“The government should not spend $55 billion on a pipeline that harms the climate. It should spend that money on climate action instead, like electric vehicles.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would be very excited, actually, if the Liberal government prioritized a climate strategy instead of building a pipeline, putting $55 billion into it, that will decimate the climate, do little to address the crisis we are faced with and exacerbate the situation we are faced with. Instead of putting $55 billion into a pipeline, we should redirect those resources to climate action, including EV vehicles and other environmental measures that are necessary for our climate.”

“Canada is not going to meet its environmental targets. This bill rushes past environmental protections and Indigenous rights. I want to know why the Prime Minister is not keeping his promises on the environment.”

“Mr. Speaker, I just came back from COP17, which was a UN conference on biodiversity, and guess what. Canada is not making its targets. The 30 by 30 goals are not going to happen under the current situation, and that is not considering Bill C-39 and the ramming through of environmental strategies, environmental protections, indigenous rights and so on. If we are going to talk about protecting the environment, I will ask the member and all members of the House, including those in the government, this question: Where is the Prime Minister who was the climate envoy at the UN and who once upon a time talked about the importance of finance and marrying the economy to the environment?”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 33 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The government did not study the costs and benefits of this pipeline. It also does not make businesses study their impact on the environment, even though fewer than 1% do so on their own. The government must require these studies before building a pipeline that will destroy the environment.”

“Mr. Speaker, I thank my good colleague for her advocacy, always, for the environment and the people. She is exactly right. There is no cost-benefit analysis. The other thing that has been pointed out is that businesses are not required to do an impact assessment on the environment with their businesses. Less than 1% of businesses actually do that work. I asked the minister directly at COP17 whether the Liberal government will impose this regulatory requirement so that we know what the impacts are. Not only is the government not doing a cost-benefit analysis, but it is not making businesses do impact assessments, which is absolutely essential when the government wants to build a pipeline that will absolutely decimate our environment.”

“The Prime Minister and the government are spending $55 billion on a pipeline that will hurt the environment. They are spending far more money on big oil than on climate plans, and they are moving backward on their environmental goals.”

“Mr. Speaker, I thank my good colleague for his work and advocacy. He is exactly spot on. The Prime Minister and the Liberal government will not hesitate one bit in dumping $55 billion into a pipeline that will decimate our environment. What we are seeing right now is the backsliding of a Liberal government on Canada’s environmental strategy. That is clear as day. The investment that it put into climate initiatives is a drop in the bucket when we compare it to the big oil investments that the Prime Minister is all too eager to dump—”

• 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 →