Business of Supply

A Conservative opposition day motion calling on the government to cancel a proposed $25-billion sovereign wealth fund, arguing that real wealth funds are built on surpluses and resource revenues while Canada runs deficits, so the money would have to be borrowed, driving up debt costs and benefiting favoured corporations. Conservatives said the government should instead cut taxes and red tape to encourage private investment, and questioned who would run the fund. Bloc Québécois members agreed the fund is not a true sovereign wealth fund because it would be debt-financed and lacked details. Liberals defended the fund as a way to invest in a stronger economy, noting other countries have such funds and that it could benefit all regions. Some time was also taken up with a procedural notice dividing Conservative speaking slots and exchanges about pipelines.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

86 statements

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative

Linked statement

“I want the government to cancel its plan for a 25-billion-dollar sovereign wealth fund. We have a huge deficit, so the government would have to borrow all of that money. That debt will drive up prices and hand cash to rich corporate insiders. Instead of borrowing money to pick winners, the government should cut taxes and red tape so private businesses can build and invest.”
  • 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

moved: That, given that, (i) sovereign wealth funds must have wealth that comes from budget surpluses and resource revenues, (ii) this government has run no surpluses, only deficits for the last 11 years and has no funds to invest, (iii) the Prime Minister is proposing to put his 25-billion-dollar fund on the national credit card, which will cause further inflationary pressure, (iv) the Prime Minister has already created 12 new Crown corporations, agencies and bureaucracies, (v) when government directs capital, it always goes to the politically powerful and not the deserving, (vi) there is over 1 trillion dollars in pension fund money that Liberals have pushed out of Canada that we could bring back with faster permits, lower taxes and free enterprise, (vii) the rising cost of fuel and food is already burdening hard working Canadians who cannot afford to pay more for handouts to Liberal insiders and corporate elites, therefore, the House call on the government to abandon this sovereign debt fund. He said: Mr. Speaker, today I am responding to the costly, gimmicky schemes of the Prime Minister, who now wants to put $25 billion on the national credit card to fund handouts for well-connected businesses, Liberal elites, and co-operative forces, all while increasing the cost of living for everyone: workers, small businesses, and seniors. We have seen that this Liberal government has already racked up 11 deficits on the national credit card. After a year of this Prime Minister, we are seeing higher costs, more debt, higher taxes, and more money on the credit card. He is just another Liberal. To have a sovereign wealth fund, there need to be funds. There are no funds because there is no surplus, unlike in Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Norway, and so on. These countries have surpluses every year, which they set aside as savings for their countries. They have no deficits. The Conservatives want to remove government barriers in order to attract private investment again, boost our economy and pay our bills through private production. That way, the cost of living will come down for Canadians who are already paying too much. That is how we will free up our economy and restore affordability. We will be strong at home and masters in our own house. Imagine someone went into their doctor’s office, and suddenly the doctor injected them with some strange substance. They asked what it was, and he said that it was a poison. They then asked why he had injected them with a poison. Immediately he pulled out another syringe and injected them with an antidote, and he said he did that so he could save their life with the antidote. They asked why he had done any of it in the first place, and they were told that he wanted to save their life because that is what he does. That is exactly how Liberal economics work. The Liberals do massive economic damage to our country, and then they claim to be its solution, its antidote. The government blocks homebuilding with taxes and red tape then sets up a fourth federal housing agency to subsidize housing. The Liberal Prime Minister blocks resource projects with high taxes, 19‑year permitting delays, and bans on oil shipping off the B.C. coast, and then he creates massive new offices to get projects built, which promise carve-outs, bail-outs and handouts to favourite businesses. The Prime Minister blocks investments with high taxes, drives $1.2 trillion of pension funds out of the country and then subsidizes investment with new corporate welfare programs. He drives up the cost of living and the cost of food with inflationary money printing, carbon taxes and red tape, then prints even more money to give people cash payments to help them with the cost of the food, which he inflated. He blocks development, taxes production, regulates investment, delays permits, drives capital away, kills projects and crushes builders. Then, when the economy slows down, the Prime Minister shows up with a subsidy, a fund, a bank, a summit, a task force and a photo op to solve the very problem he caused. Instead of just following the Hippocratic oath to do no harm, the government does plenty of harm and then claims that it provides the cure. Like the great Ronald Reagan said, if it moves, a Liberal taxes it. If it keeps moving, he regulates it, and when it stops moving, he subsidizes it. Why not just get out of the way and let things move? Why not let the builder build, the worker work, the investor invest, the farmer farm, the miner mine, the manufacturer manufacture and the trucker truck? It is because then there would be no role for the Liberal politician, no power, no control, no permit to authorize and no cheque to hand out. If people could just launch a business, produce resources, grow food and build homes, the Prime Minister and the people within his castle walls would be irrelevant. Instead he forces everything to go through him. He basically creates a regulatory prison and charges a ransom for anyone who wants to build something to get out of it. If they want a place to live or food in their stomach, they have to wait for the government to send back some of their money. If they want to build a home or a pipeline, they have to kneel before the king and seek his good graces. If they want investment for their enterprise, they have to bow before the state. State-controlled crony capitalism is how the Liberal Prime Minister enriched himself. In fact, his Brookfield investments profit off government favours that typically help a tiny group of politically powerful but unproductive takers at the expense of the great mass of productive makers. Help is the sunny side of control. It is the illusion of action from the people who caused the problem, the illusion of investment from the people who drove the investment away and the illusion of growth from those who blocked the growth because, in this Liberal model, the economy does not belong to the people; it belongs to the politicians, bureaucrats and other authorities who control it and the powers that influence them. The real debate in our economy today is that of a political economy versus a market economy. A political economy allocates wealth based on power. A market economy allocates wealth based on free choice. Enter the sovereign wealth fund, which has no wealth. It is another Liberal illusion. Countries with real sovereign wealth funds, such as Singapore, Norway, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, accumulate surpluses year after year, which they then squirrel away and invest to grow bigger returns for their people. The Liberal Prime Minister has no surplus to invest. In fact, the net equity of the government is negative $1.3 trillion. If we take all the assets and deduct all the liabilities, that is what is left. We call that our national debt. Just two days ago, the Prime Minister announced that he is running the 11th Liberal deficit, which is being put on the national credit card. There is more debt, more taxes and more costs on the credit card. The Prime Minister is just another Liberal. In fact, he has doubled the deficit since Trudeau left office, so he has no wealth to put into the wealth fund. He has something else: debt. He wants to put $25 billion more on our national credit card to invest in politically connected companies. Who will get the money? It is those with the political power. The Liberal Prime Minister plans to hold yet another summit, this time with multinational corporations and billionaires, to offer them access to government money and allow them to circumvent the brutal red tape and taxes he imposes on all other businesses. He will demand that these businesses, which will ultimately get permits to go ahead and get around the restrictive red tape and taxes, will give the government an ownership stake. It is almost like charging a ransom for letting them out of the regulatory prison he has created. The million or so small businesses without lobbyists will still be stuck in that regulatory prison, forced to pay taxes to subsidize their larger, more politically powerful competitors. It is the golden rule: Those with the gold make the rules. The small elite turns power into wealth, wealth back into more power and then more power back into more wealth. The cycle continues until they have it all. They get richer, making everyone else poorer. In a political economy, the elite profit not by having the best product, but by having the best lobbyists. It is not how much value they create for customers. It is how much influence they have over ministers, regulators, agencies and insiders. The most important commodities in the political economy are influence and power. In a market economy, people get ahead by serving the people. We sell a product only if someone wants to buy it. We hire a worker only if the worker freely chooses the job and the employer values the work. We attract investment only if we can prove that we can create more value tomorrow than we will consume today. That is the magic of the free market. People cannot get ahead without making someone else better off. We know that because they would not engage in the voluntary transaction if it did not make them better off. That is why, in a free market, when one buys something and says “thank you” to the vendor, the vendor often does not say “you are welcome”. They say “thank you” back. This is because the seller values the money more than what they sold and the buyer values the product more than what they paid. If someone wants an apple and has an orange, and I want an orange and have an apple, and we trade, we still have an apple and an orange between us, but we are both richer because each of us has something worth more to us than what we had before; thus the double “thank you” when we trade. By contrast, a state-controlled economy is based entirely on force. Everything the government does, it does by force because taxation is mandatory and not voluntary. That is why no one ever writes “thank you” on their tax form. The transaction was imposed. Even if it was a good transaction, it was not a free one. Free exchange allows work for wages, product for payment and investment for interest. It is free people making free choices and building a free country. By contrast, a government-controlled economy works differently. As I said, it operates by coercion, and in relationships of coercion, the strongest always win and the weakest always get crushed. The Prime Minister quoted Thucydides in his Davos speech, saying that the strong do what they will and the weak do what they must. The government taxes, regulates and blocks the productive economy, then uses our own money to create programs that promise to fix the damage it caused. This is not Robin Hood. It is the sheriff of Nottingham. It takes from the workers, builders, taxpayers and investors, running their money through bureaucracy, consultants, lobbyists and insiders, and lets a few drops trickle back down to the people who paid for it in the first place. This is state-controlled crony capitalism, a system where government concentrates money in fewer hands based on power, and where most businesses and citizens never have the political clout needed to get a meeting, win a carve-out, secure a subsidy or escape that regulatory prison. Make no mistake, regulatory prison is what it is. If someone wants to build a mine or a pipeline, they must wait. If they want to build a home, they must wait. If they want to build a port, a road, a transmission line, a factory, a terminal, a refinery or a railway, they must wait, fill out the forms, hire consultants, lobby a minister, please the regulator and win some political influence. Maybe they will then have a chance. After years of delay, they might get government support, as the Prime Minister likes to call it. If a project is good enough to receive regulatory support, why not just approve it in the first place? Why should a company have to win over a politician to get something built? Why should a project have to give up a piece of its ownership to the state in order to escape the prison of heavy regulations? This is the model the Liberal Prime Minister believes in, and that is because it is the model that enriched him in the first place, not by doing business in the marketplace, but by using political power to get favours for his company. We remember that the Prime Minister pushed for heat pump subsidies. Well, Brookfield sells heat pumps. We remember that he pushed for money-printing inflation. Well, the CEO of Brookfield confirmed on May 20 of last year that Brookfield profits off of inflation, saying, “many of our things are regulated, rate-based or contractual in nature, and inflation is actually a positive to the numbers, so as inflation comes in, it actually helps the revenue streams of those businesses”. The Prime Minister said a little over a year ago that he had successfully lobbied for a more expensive form of so-called sustainable aviation fuel right before Brookfield, his company, invested a billion dollars in that same fuel, forcing Canadian passengers to pay higher airline fees for this more pricey fuel, which his company then profited from. This is not business; this is political manipulation. It raises the cost for everyone, especially those who do not have political power. That is the difference between the real economy and the protected economy. In the real economy, inflation crushes families. It raises grocery bills. It raises rent and mortgage payments. It costs people more for gas, heat and electricity. It shuts young people out of home ownership and starting families. In a political economy, inflation can be used as a revenue tool for elites and schemers. The government creates the rule. The rule creates the market. The insider sees the rule coming. The insider invests, and the consumer pays the politically connected profit. Everyone else is told that this is progress. Canadians will pay the price through higher inflation at the grocery store, taxes on their paycheques and debt interest for future generations. We have seen this movie before. I just mentioned that there is going to be a big summit where a whole series of multinationals and billionaires will come and feast on this $25 billion. This is not a new idea. In 2016, the Liberal government hosted another international summit of investors at a Shangri‑La hotel to unveil the Infrastructure Bank, a $45‑billion pot of gold that went to subsidizing the investments of insiders. Here we are, 10 years later, and a Liberal government is holding the same kind of summit to allow the same elites to feast on the same debt. Since the creation of the Infrastructure Bank, it has lost hundreds of millions of dollars. For its first seven years, its investment income failed to cover even its operating costs. The Parliamentary Budget Officer found that, when all levels of government were included, two out of every three dollars used for projects funded by the bank came from the taxpayer, not from businesses. Taxpayers lost and insiders won. The bank spent a quarter of a billion dollars on operations. The CEO makes $600,000 a year. It paid out $8 million in bonuses in one year. That is why a parliamentary committee studied it thoroughly and recommended it be eliminated. Now, instead of doing that, the Liberals are augmenting it with yet another slush fund. Then, in September of 2024, the then Liberal finance minister Chrystia Freeland pledged to create a Canada growth fund, seeded with taxpayers’ dollars, to try to bring back the $1.2 trillion of pension funds that the Liberal government had driven abroad. Who was tapped to administer that fund? It was Brookfield. That was barely two years ago, and here we go again. There is another summit, another fund, another transition office and another name for the same old Liberal idea. There is an illusion of change, but the reality is that it is more of the same. Desjardins wrote that the proposed fund draws strong parallels to the Infrastructure Bank. The Montreal Economic Institute called it “essentially the Canadian Infrastructure Bank under a different name.” It is the same poison with a new label, more costs, more corruption, more debt, more taxes and more on the credit card. The Liberal Prime Minister is just another Liberal. We have seen how we can build wealth when we unlock the power of the free enterprise system. The answer is not to weigh the economy down with even more government agencies on top of the countless number that already existed a year ago, and the 13 new ones that the Prime Minister has since created. We need to unblock and unlock the potential of our resources and our people. The answer is more economic freedom, such as the freedom to build, to produce, to hire, to invest and to compete. We must replace an economy of carve-outs, handouts and bailouts for insiders with free choice, opportunity and affordability. If a project is safe, lawful and in the national interest, just approve it. If a company can build without taxpayers’ money, let it build now. If workers can build bigger paycheques by producing energy, minerals, food, homes, steel, aluminum, copper and more, we need to get the government out of the way and let them do it. Let businesses compete for customers, not political favour. Let entrepreneurs win with the best product, not the best lobbyists. Let workers earn a powerful paycheque, not wait for government handouts. Let Canadians build sovereign wealth, not borrow sovereign debt. This is the choice: state-controlled crony capitalism, where political influence becomes the most valuable commodity, or a free market where work, savings, risk-taking and service create prosperity for everyone. The options are a top-down, state-controlled, crony capitalist system or a bottom-up, merit-based, free enterprise system. A political aristocracy or an economic meritocracy is the choice. We want this to be a country that restores the promise to the people that anyone who works hard can enjoy an affordable home, a safe street, good food on the table and realize their dreams. We want a country where our people get ahead by having the best product and the best work, not by having the most political influence. We do not want a country of bureaucrats and busybodies, of gatekeepers and grifters, of tax collectors and toll masters. We want a country of artists and adventurers, entrepreneurs and explorers, workers and warriors, pioneers and patriots. That is the country we seek to build. Now, let us get to building.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Canadians chose our leader because he has strong economic experience to deal with issues like trade and tariffs. Canada needs a national investment fund to support our economy and our people. I want to know why the Conservative leader does not support this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, a year ago, Canadians had the opportunity to decide. It was a decision that was made based on how the economy was doing. People were genuinely concerned about Trump, tariffs and trade. They were concerned about the economy and affordability. They looked at the leader of the Conservative Party and contrasted him with the leader of the Liberal Party, who had been appointed as the Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Governor of the Bank of England, and who has had an impeccable career dealing with economic measures. The Canada Strong fund, a national sovereign wealth fund, is something that Canada needs. It is something Canadians will support, because they understand the necessity of supporting Canada’s economy, and at the same time, supporting Canadians. Why does the leader of the Conservative Party not support a government that invests in Canada and invests in Canadians?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“I have been right about the economy for 22 years, and the Prime Minister has been wrong. He was wrong about the carbon tax, stopping pipelines, and inflation. How can he be wrong so often?”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 10 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there he goes again. The member has been giving the same speech on the same Liberal side for the last decade. He speaks, and the reality— An hon. member: As you have done for 22 years. Hon. Pierre Poilievre: Mr. Speaker, for 22 years, on every single economic issue, I have been proven right. On every single economic issue, the Liberal Prime Minister has been proven wrong. The Prime Minister was wrong to say that we needed bigger and broader carbon taxes. He was wrong to say that we needed to keep 50% of our oil in the ground. He was wrong to testify before a parliamentary committee against the northern gateway pipeline, which would be moving $30 billion of oil overseas today, had the government not blocked it. He was wrong to say that we would have deflation after COVID. He was wrong to say that money printing would not cause inflation. He was wrong just weeks ago when he said that affordability is the best it has been in the decade. How is it that he has been so wrong for so long?

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Lac-Saint-Jean

Bloc Québécois
“I agree that the government's new investment fund is just a gimmick. I want the Leader of the Opposition to explain how Norway's real wealth fund is different from this Liberal fund.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 24 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 would like to congratulate the Leader of the Opposition. I believe he hit the nail on the head when he started his speech by describing the new Canada Strong fund as a “gimmick”. I would like to thank him on behalf of the Bloc Québécois. The Leader of the Opposition has economic expertise. I have heard many MPs and ministers, and even the Liberal Prime Minister, compare the new Canada Strong fund to Norway’s sovereign wealth fund. Could the Leader of the Opposition explain the difference between the sovereign wealth fund—Norway’s genuine sovereign wealth fund—and the sovereign wealth fund of the new Liberal government?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“Norway can have a wealth fund because it saves its oil money and has budget surpluses. Canada cannot do that because we run deficits every year. The government will have to borrow money to make these investments, which is risky and irresponsible.”
  • 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, I would like to thank the member for his compliment about the expression I used in French, “patente à gosses”. Every day, I try to learn a little more of the language of Molière. A little poetry can sometimes be a delight. The difference is that Norway’s sovereign wealth fund contains funds. It is simple. We do not have any funds here. The people of Norway have surpluses because they take revenue from the oil industry, which makes up 25% of their economy, and they put that revenue in a fund and invest it. Here in Canada, we do not have surpluses. We have deficits year after year. The government is just going to put this investment on the credit card. It is taking big risks with money that belongs to future generations by charging this to the credit card. That is irresponsible, and it is the opposite of what the folks in Norway do.

Sandra Cobena, Newmarket—Aurora

Conservative
“More Canadian businesses have closed than opened for six straight quarters. Owners are leaving the country because of high taxes, bad rules, and permit delays. I want to know if this fund will fix those problems.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we have seen the statistics. We in Canada now have had six consecutive quarters of more businesses shutting down than opening up. It is an entrepreneurial drought. Of course, these are the Canadians who have been grinding it out, opening early, closing late and making personal sacrifices. They cite regulatory uncertainty, delays in permitting and overtaxation. These are the Canadian dollars that are actually leaving the country. My question for the member is, does he think this fund will fix those issues?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“More businesses are closing in Canada than opening, and money is leaving the country. Canadian business owners are now opening more businesses in the United States instead of here. The government's investment summit will only help big multinational corporations, not small Canadian businesses.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question. The member is quite right. For six consecutive quarters, there have been more businesses that have closed than opened in Canada. A recent survey showed there are twice as many Canadian businesses that opened in 2024 outside of Canada than inside of Canada. For the elbows-up crowd in the room, Canadians are now opening more businesses in the United States than they are opening in Canada. In the last decade, $1 trillion of net investment has flowed out of our country. A majority of Canadian pension funds are, according to Statistics Canada, invested abroad and not here at home, a problem that has worsened since the Prime Minister took office. Now, the question was very particular: Would the million small businesses across this country benefit? Of course not. They will not be invited to the investment summit. It will just be for large multinational corporations that have political power. Small businesses that serve customers will lose. Multinationals that serve politicians in power will win.

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“I disagree with the member's doubt about a sovereign wealth fund. In the past, Canadians bought war bonds to invest in the country's future. This fund gives Canadians another good chance to invest in our growth.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite’s speech, but obviously I do not share his pessimism about the sovereign wealth fund. Generations ago we had examples with victory bonds, with war bonds. We have had examples of Canadians stepping up, especially at times when Canada’s sovereignty has been tested, throughout our history, when Canadians want to participate in investing in the future that they want to build for this country. Would the member not say that this is a welcome opportunity for Canadians to be able to participate in the prosperity and growth that the government is moving forward on?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“Canada's economy has not grown in ten years. It is doing worse than all other G7 countries. The government has not fixed taxes or cut bad rules, and the deficit has doubled. People can already invest in businesses if they want to. The government should not force them to take on $25 billion in debt to give money to powerful corporations.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
  • A repeated line

    “Since the Liberal Prime Minister took office.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since April 30.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is no prosperity and growth to participate in. This economy has not grown in a decade. In fact, Canada has had the worst economic performance of all G7 countries. Since the Liberal Prime Minister took office, nothing has changed. There has been no regulatory reform and no tax reform, and not a single antidevelopment law has been eliminated. Other than to rename the carbon tax as the clean fuel standard, there has been no serious tax reform. Finally, and I guess it is the only difference, the deficit is twice the size now of what it was under Justin Trudeau. Now, as for participating in growing the Canadian economy, people have the freedom right now to buy into a Canadian stock index if they want to do that. I do not understand why they need the government to force them to take on a $25-billion liability on the credit card for the Liberal government to dole out, in a political slush fund, to those politically powerful corporations.

Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères

Bloc Québécois
“The government said this wealth fund would be independent. It is not independent if the Prime Minister chooses which projects get funded.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, among other things, this so-called sovereign wealth fund—so called because that is the tagline the liberal government baptized it with—is tasked with investing in projects selected by the Major Projects Office. The thing is, the Prime Minister himself is the one who decides what projects to send to the Major Projects Office. We were told the sovereign wealth fund would be independent, but how can it be independent if the Prime Minister is the one choosing which projects to fund?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“The Prime Minister is hurting the economy with high taxes and too many rules. He picks a few favoured businesses to get special help and avoid regulations, while ignoring small businesses. He should let the free market work so all businesses can do well.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Respect 88 of 100

    This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “the Prime Minister wants to be king of the economy”.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wants to be king of the economy. He is holding on to all kinds of regulations that are hurting businesses. Businesses that are getting ahead are being slapped down with hefty taxes, except for a small group personally chosen by the Prime Minister. The member is absolutely right: Under the law, these powers all belong to the Prime Minister. That is no exaggeration. These special businesses will be able to sidestep all the rules and receive subsidies and gifts from the fund, which opens the door to corruption and leaves millions of small businesses out in the cold. Why not open up the free market so that all businesses can prosper?

Alex Ruff, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound

Conservative
“This fund is paid for with borrowed money. It adds to our national debt and will hurt our children's future.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my question to the hon. Leader of the Opposition is about the fact that this fund is, basically, being funded on the taxpayers’ credit cards. We are already paying to service our national debt, and this will just add to it. Going forward, it is going to have an impact on the hon. leader’s children, my daughter and the youth in this country being able to live a prosperous life in the future.

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“The government is spending 60 billion dollars a year on debt interest. That costs each family 3,400 dollars this year, and it is growing fast. We must balance the budget and control spending.”
  • 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, it is now $60 billion of annual interest, money for bankers and bondholders, not doctors and nurses, and $3,400 from every family will go to pay interest on the federal debt this year. That number will go up by 50% over the next five years. This is the fastest-growing item on the government’s budget right now: interest on the debt. It will enrich the bankers and the bondholders at the expense of hard-working people and threaten the future of our kids. That is why we need to restore fiscal responsibility, balanced budgets and controlled spending.

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“Our government's economic plan is working. We are starting a $25-billion national wealth fund to invest in energy, minerals, farming, and infrastructure. Everyday Canadians will be able to invest in this fund too, so everyone can share in the profits.”
  • A repeated line

    “Our government is focused on what we can control.”

    Said 9 times by 7 members since April 30.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it will come as no surprise that I do not share the views and pessimism coming from the Conservative leader in the House. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today about the sovereign wealth fund that our Prime Minister and Minister of Finance announced just before the spring economic update. There is no doubt that Canada’s economy is at a very important moment, a hinge moment. Around the world, countries are competing for investment, talent and opportunity. Supply chains are shifting dramatically, global energy systems are evolving quickly, and technological change is accelerating, especially with the AI revolution. In this environment, economic strength does not happen by accident. It is built deliberately through smart policy, strong partnerships and a clear focus on long-term growth. Our government has been focused on what we can control. There are many things we cannot control, but there are many that we can. Building a strong, sustainable and inclusive economy is within our control, an economy that is backed by an ambitious plan to help enable $1 trillion in total investment across Canada over the next five years. That plan is well under way. We saw in the spring economic update quite a large number of signs of progress. As we build a stronger Canada, we must ensure that all Canadians can benefit, now and for generations to come. The spring economic update 2026 builds on the momentum of budget 2025 with strategic investments that support productivity, innovation, growth and competitiveness, and that position Canada for long-term prosperity. This means delivering generational infrastructure and nation-building projects, like the 21 projects listed, with $125 billion in new investment and over 60,000 jobs. It also means diversifying Canada’s trade. We have seen 20 new trade and security agreements signed and a 38% increase in non-U.S. trade over the short term, or a time frame of just about eight months. We are also supporting workers and young people. In the spring economic update, we see an initiative to recruit, train and hire 80,000 to 100,000 more skilled trade workers. On building more homes, we are accelerating $7 billion in low-cost financing for rental apartment construction. It also means protecting the safety and security of Canadians. We see the creation of the financial crimes agency, and security for places of worship, in the spring economic update. These are very important initiatives. We are also investing in strong communities. We see sports, from playground to podium. We see small craft harbours, mostly in Atlantic Canada but recognizing that they are all across our coastal communities and very important to building strong communities. The government is making these key investments while maintaining Canada’s strong fiscal stewardship, which has positioned Canada, according to the International Monetary Fund, to have the second-fastest projected growth in the G7 and the strongest fiscal position in the G7. Let me repeat that. We have the strongest fiscal position in the G7, according to the International Monetary Fund. That is good news. I know Conservatives do not like to hear that, but it is good news for Canada and certainly a sign that we are building prosperity from a position of strength. One of the measures announced in the spring economic update was the creation of the Canada Strong fund, Canada’s first sovereign wealth fund. Sovereign wealth funds are not just financial tools but nation-building investments in the future of a country. They represent a country’s belief in its own future. They take today’s revenues, often generated from hard-won economic strength, and invest them with purpose, discipline and a long-term view. Instead of spending everything in the moment, sovereign wealth funds build enduring assets that can support generations to come. This is the intention of the Canada Strong fund. It will do exactly that. It will help more Canadians be able to participate in the generational wealth building that we are achieving together. Through an initial federal contribution of $25 billion, the fund will strategically invest, alongside the private sector and based on commercial terms, in Canadian projects and companies driving our economic transformation. This includes projects in clean and conventional energy, critical minerals, agriculture and the infrastructure that we need in this country. The returns will be reinvested to grow the Canada Strong fund, so it will be compound growth, strengthening its capacity over time. As that fund grows, it will direct capital toward investments with the highest potential return for Canada and Canadians. To ensure that Canadians have the option to invest in the growth of our nation and share in the returns, the government will launch a retail investment product, which will be principal-protected. This will give Canadians a direct stake in our nation’s long-term prosperity and help build long-term national wealth. The Canada Strong fund will operate at arm’s length from government. We will create a new Crown corporation, and its work will be guided by a CEO and a qualified, independent board of directors. This model will ensure that both in the near term and in the long term the fund remains focused on its mission: supporting the transformation of the economy and creating wealth for Canadians. Canadian companies and investors are coming forward to build Canada’s future, and investors from around the world are choosing to invest in that future. We have seen many examples of this, with foreign direct investment in Canada reaching an almost 20‑year high, $97 billion of inflows. This is significant progress over the last 20 years. We see this as being a high point. We have heard from RBC, our largest bank, and from our largest pension plan, the Canada pension plan, that Canada is garnering the attention of many global investors. This is really strong evidence or signs that our plan is working. Transformational projects and companies that will help build and create a stronger, more independent and more resilient economy for Canada will stand to benefit from the sovereign wealth fund. The Canada Strong fund takes one step further, making sure that all Canadians are the beneficiaries of the financial returns that these projects will generate. Not only are we making it easier for those projects to get off the ground through the Major Projects Office, but we are also ensuring that our indigenous partners are able to participate through the loan guarantee program that our government has capitalized. We also want to make sure that all Canadians can participate in the proceeds that will come from the strong returns from many of these large infrastructure projects. This is how we ensure that Canadians have a direct stake in our nation’s long-term prosperity. It is one of the many things our government is doing to build Canada strong. In addition to the Canada Strong fund, our government is securing a more prosperous, competitive and sovereign future through initiatives like the buy Canadian policy and the Major Projects Office. I want to take a moment and talk about solidarity. The Prime Minister, in his famous speech at Davos, talked about solidarity. I think that, now more than ever, Canadians want to be a part of the Canada Strong plan. They want to be a part of building the strongest, most prosperous country in the G7. They are inspired by that vision. I think they see the potential. The sovereign wealth fund, the first ever in Canada, which I have long thought would be a good idea, enables Canadians to show their solidarity by putting in small amounts they are able to invest in Canada’s future and then benefiting from the proceeds and the prosperity we are building together. That, to me, is a great sign of solidarity. Canadians can help build this country in many different ways. They can become skilled tradespersons, but they are also able to invest in major infrastructure projects and very large projects. This is a way they can come alongside. The sovereign wealth fund will come alongside institutional investors from both around the world and here in Canada to ensure that Canadians benefit in many ways from these projects. Not only are we going to get a boost in productivity from these major infrastructure projects, as many of them support us getting more goods to foreign markets so we can help diversify the economy, but they are also going to have significant returns. We want to make sure that Canadians can participate in that. The spring economic update outlined a clear plan to build a strong and resilient Canada, built by Canadians with Canadian materials for Canadians. Ultimately, the goal is very straightforward. It is about ensuring that Canada can compete globally, attract the investment we need and create opportunity here at home for all Canadians. It is about building an economy that is resilient in the face of global change and the many challenges and headwinds we face, inclusive in its outcomes and strong enough to support future generations. We want to make sure the Canada we are building will create generational wealth for Canadians. It is about making thoughtful choices today that set Canada up not just to grow, but to lead for the future. The Canada Strong fund is a great example of how we will do this, turning today’s resources into tomorrow’s opportunities and investing for long-term prosperity, resilience and a shared sense of national success. It is that sense of solidarity all Canadians have, that sense of pride in our country, that sense of the strength we have in all of us, that grit we have as Canadians: that we want to build a better future, that we want to do it together, that we are a part of the same mission and vision as a country, and that we all should participate and benefit from the prosperity we are building together. I am happy to take questions.

Arnold Viersen, Peace River—Westlock

Conservative
“Canada has lots of natural resources and should be rich. Instead, 10 years of Liberal rule have left us in deep debt. Where will the money for this wealth fund come from?”
  • A repeated line

    “Canada should be the wealthiest country in the world.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since April 30.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is fascinating to me. As Conservatives, we believe Canada is one of the greatest countries in the world, and we should be the wealthiest country in the world. We have unlimited natural resources. We are the envy of the entire world when it comes to our energy resources, yet here we are in massive deficits run for 10 years by Liberal governments. Where does the member think the wealth should come from for this so-called wealth fund?

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“I support creating a sovereign wealth fund. It will invest in major projects that create jobs, bring in tax revenue, and help all Canadians share in the country's wealth.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 44 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I know the member opposite and I share many differences, but the one thing we can agree on is that Canada is the greatest country in the world and has the greatest potential to be even stronger and more prosperous than it is today. This is exactly what the sovereign wealth fund intends to do. Again, it is to help all Canadians be able to participate in the prosperity that we are building and those major projects, which are going to have high returns. I know members opposite believe in many of those projects that run through their parts of the country, which are going to benefit their communities with work opportunities and with new tax revenue for other levels of government, including the federal government. The sovereign wealth fund is going to help us give Canadians the opportunity to participate in that prosperity.

Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères

Bloc Québécois
“The government's wealth fund is based on debt, not savings. How much debt did Canada take on for it? How much will that debt cost taxpayers each year?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have a simple question for the member opposite. The government talks about a sovereign wealth fund, but we know perfectly well that this fund is only masquerading as one. Sovereign wealth funds exist in almost every country of the world. They are based on savings and what people decide to put away for future needs. In this case, however, the fund is based on debt, not savings. My questions for my colleague opposite are as follows. How much debt has Canada taken on to create this phoney sovereign wealth fund? How much is this extra debt going to cost taxpayers annually?

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“Canada should create a national wealth fund now. Other places like Alberta, Quebec, Norway, and Singapore show that these funds save money and help build wealth for everyday people.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I know there is much we can learn from other entities around the world that are similar to the Canada sovereign wealth fund. We can draw lessons from Quebec’s generations fund and from Alberta’s heritage savings trust fund. We can draw learnings from Norway and Singapore. Many of these large income-generating national wealth funds have been built over decades. The idea for Canada to be setting one of these up now has the perfect timing, in my view. In fact, I would suggest that we should have done this probably 30 years ago, but it is really great that we are going to do this now to be able to have a nest egg that builds wealth in this country and distributes it to everyday Canadians.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“We want to build a strong economy and lead the G7. We are doing that through trade, new investments, and special funds. I want to know what my colleague thinks about how important this plan is.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if my colleague could provide his thoughts in regard to just how important this is in recognizing that we want to build a strong, healthy economy. We have set the goal of being the strongest in the G7. That is the goal. Part of that is recognizing that whether it is looking for trade opportunities or attracting investment into Canada or the Canada Strong fund or the sovereign wealth fund, these are all part of a much bigger picture that the Prime Minister and this government have put forward to the House in order to emphasize how critically important it is to build Canada strong for all Canadians.

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“We are making it easier to build big projects and invest in Canada. We created an office to speed up project approvals. We also added tax credits and deductions so businesses can buy new equipment and do research.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 43 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that question is one that I feel very passionate about answering, because there are many things we are doing on many fronts. The Major Projects Office obviously addresses challenges that this country has faced, in terms of streamlining projects and getting approvals where investment has not been strong enough in Canada. That is exactly the intent of the Major Projects Office, to remove a lot of the barriers for investment to come into Canada and to streamline that process so we can build big things again in this country. That is great news, but it is only part of the picture. In our budget, we moved forward with new investment tax credits and strengthening those, the clean economy investment tax credits. We moved forward with major deductions and immediate expensing for businesses across Canada so they can invest in new machinery and equipment, research and development, protecting their intellectual property and much more. These things help attract investment in this country. That is exactly what we are doing, and the sovereign wealth fund is an example of how we ensure that Canadians can benefit from that.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 114

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 86 statements
  2. Government Orders Business of Supply 29 statements
  3. Oral Questions Finance 12 statements
  4. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 6 statements
  5. Oral Questions Finance 15 statements
  6. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions Finance 11 statements
  8. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Finance 19 statements
  10. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 6 statements
  12. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Air Transportation 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Mental Health and Addictions 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Business of the House 2 statements
  17. Government Orders Business of Supply 53 statements
  18. Private Members' Business National Framework on the Durability of Electronic Products and Essential Home Appliances Act 13 statements
  19. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  20. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  21. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements