“The government finally cancelled the carbon tax after attacking people who opposed it for ten years. Now they are bragging about cutting the fuel tax by 10 cents, but history shows the Liberals always end up raising taxes.”

“Mr. Speaker, yes, a year ago the government cancelled the carbon tax. I have to remind him that from 2015 to 2025, he spent all day long attacking those people who said that it was not very good to have a carbon tax. The Liberals said all the wrong things about that, but finally they recognized that was the right thing to do. The member is talking about the tax break that his government gave for 10¢ of taxe d’accise, as we are calling it in French. By the way, in 1979, we have to remember that under Joe Clark, the Progressive Conservative Party government applied this and said that we had to raise it to a level that was attacked by the Liberals at that time, but when they were back in power in 1980, they doubled that taxation. To the point about the taxe d’accise of 10¢—”

“The government has been in power for over a year and still refuses to work with the opposition parties. It only has a majority because members crossed the floor to join it.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague; his questions are always pertinent. It is indeed a pity that the government, which has now been in office for over a year, has not gone to the trouble of engaging with the opposition parties, which is absolutely essential, particularly in the case of a minority government. That said, for the past few weeks, there has been talk of it being a majority government. It is a defector-led majority. It is a majority government made up of floor crossers. It is funny; I think it sounds quite good in both English and French.”

• 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 →

“The government is spending too much money and adding to Canada's debt. Now we have to spend more money paying off that debt instead of funding public services. What are the consequences of this spending?”

“Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals treat Canadians like a cash cow and spend so irresponsibly, they are adding more money to the national credit card, which means we have to put more money toward repaying the debt than funding public services. What are the consequences of this kind of spending?”

“The government is spending too much money. This creates debt and deficits. Every cent we pay in GST now goes just to pay interest on the national debt. The government broke its promise to balance the budget.”

“Mr. Speaker, I hear my colleagues from the Bloc Québécois applauding my colleague, who speaks impeccable French, with genuine enthusiasm. Incidentally, I urge everyone to read the biography he published a few months ago of our leader, the Leader of the Opposition. My colleague’s question is essential and fundamental. When someone lives beyond their means, sooner or later, they have to pay for that spending. What does that lead to? It leads to debt, deficits and interest on the debt. We know that every penny of GST we pay is used solely to pay the interest on the debt. That is terrible. It is great for bankers but terrible for Canadians. That is why we need to adopt a responsible and realistic approach. Unfortunately, the government that was elected in 2015 on the promise that there would be no deficit in 2019 has thrown that promise away.”

“I oppose this bill. It only gives temporary tax breaks on fuel instead of permanently cutting fuel and carbon taxes. It also adds too much to the national debt without solving the high cost of living.”

“Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the hard-working small business owners, farmers and families in my riding of Middlesex—London, I say enough is enough. Bill C-30, the Liberal government’s spring economic update implementation bill, does little to improve the quality of life for Canadians but does saddle them with lost investment opportunities and more generational debt. After months of the Prime Minister promising real change, Canadians are receiving more of the same temporary band-aids and half measures that fail to address the root causes of the affordability crisis, which is making life more expensive for every family across the country. Let me be perfectly clear from the outset: This is not a serious economic policy but a collection of short-term, worthless political gestures designed to create headlines while the Liberals avoid making the hard decisions that Canada needs to get our economy back on track. What does Bill C-30 actually deliver? It provides a temporary suspension of the federal excise tax on gasoline and diesel, but only until September 7. That is just four and a half months of partial relief. After that, the taxes snap right back, so families will be struggling at the pumps, small businesses will still face high operating costs and farmers will still have to pay more to bring food to our tables. For those in Middlesex—London, where our rural roads stretch for kilometres and agriculture is the backbone of our local economy, this bill provides no relief at all. Farmers rely on diesel to run tractors, combines and transport trucks. Truckers haul our produce to market. Families drive long distances just to get to the city to buy groceries, go to a medical appointment or go to the grocery store. What the Liberal government is offering is not meaningful support. The bill gives it the opportunity for photo ops, plain and simple. It is a short-term gimmick to distract from the real pain that Canadians are facing every single day. Conservatives have been crystal clear. We want the permanent removal of all federal taxes on fuel for the remainder of 2026 and beyond. That would deliver real, tangible results and savings of roughly 25¢ per litre at the pumps for families, truckers and farmers right across the country. That is about $1,200 a year for an average family. That is real help for the producers who keep our grocery store shelves stocked. Instead, the Liberals are offering this fleeting discount and calling it leadership. I call it what it is, which is insufficient and insulting to people who are struggling. This pattern of temporary fixes repeats throughout the bill. There are minor tweaks to tax deductions for tradespeople, short extensions to EI benefits, small adjustments to the Canada pension plan and a few technical changes, such as an enhanced capital cost allowance. These may sound good in Liberal press releases and offer some temporary minor relief to some Canadians, but they do nothing to solve the real root causes of the problems, which are reckless Liberal spending, exploding Liberal deficits and a government that refuses to live within its means. The so-called hero banker PM has run the federal deficit nearly double in less than a year, and there is nothing to show for it. We are now looking at the largest deficit, outside of the pandemic, in our history. The national debt exceeds $1.3 trillion. Interest payments alone now cost taxpayers more than $59 billion annually, more than we spend on health transfers to the provinces. Every Canadian family is effectively paying over $3,400 a year just to service this debt. That is money that could go toward schools and hospitals, or back into the pockets of hard-working Canadians, the ones who earned it. While families in Middlesex—London are being forced to choose between filling their gas tank or their grocery cart and between paying the hydro bill or the mortgage, the Liberals are busy creating new funds and new ways to spend the money we do not have. They call it an “investment in the future”, but Canadians, especially rural Canadians, call that more debt being passed on to our children and grandchildren. As someone who comes from a farming background, I hear every week from constituents that high fuel costs, with carbon taxes layered on top, and red tape are threatening the family farms that have been in operation for generations. These are the people who work from dawn to dusk to produce the food we all depend on, yet the government continues to punish them with policies that drive up their input costs while grocery prices keep climbing for everyone else. The bill captures the Liberal approach perfectly: It manages the crisis instead of solves it and offers temporary relief instead of structural reform. The Liberals spend more, tax more and regulate more, and then hope no one notices when the bill is due. If I were not a responsible, functioning adult, I might think that was a good idea. The Conservatives offer a fundamentally different vision, one grounded in common sense and fiscal responsibility. We believe that the government should live within its means, just as families and farmers across Middlesex—London do every single day. That starts with permanently axing the carbon tax, not just the consumer portion but the entire carbon tax, including the industrial backstop that is driving up the cost of fuel, fertilizers and natural gas for drying grain and heating barns. The Conservatives would cut wasteful bureaucracy and the billions of dollars that are being squandered to consultants. We would repeal antidevelopment laws, such as Bill C-69, that block pipelines, energy projects and resource development. We would get serious about building homes by slashing red tape, speeding up approvals, incentivizing municipalities to build faster and removing the barriers that have made home ownership a distant dream for young families in our communities. Only the Conservatives would unleash our natural resources responsibly so that Canada could be a leader in affordable, reliable energy, not just for ourselves but also for our allies around the world. By developing our oil and gas and critical minerals responsibly, we could create good jobs in ridings like mine that are rich in nearby manufacturing and development. We could also lower energy prices at home, strengthen our economic sovereignty and ensure that Canada is no longer held hostage by foreign supply chains. I reject the idea that Canadians must keep paying higher taxes so that Ottawa can keep spending recklessly. I believe hard-working families deserve to keep more of their own money. I believe farmers and small businesses should not be punished for producing the foods and goods that keep this country running. I believe that the best way to help people is not through more government programs and subsidies, but through lower taxes, less red tape and real economic growth that creates opportunities for everyone. Bill C-30 would fail the test on every level. It is another chapter in the long, Liberal story of big promises and small results. It is more illusions of affordability, more illusions of fiscal irresponsibility and more credit card budgeting that would leave future generations to pay the price. I am fed up. Canadians are fed up. They are tired of seeing their grocery and gas bills and their receipts go up, while their paycheques stay the same and their purchasing power shrinks. They are tired of broken promises from a government that talks about hope but purposely does nothing in its power to keep people from feeling hopeless. Canadians are tired of being told to just wait, while cynical Liberal politicians in Ottawa play games with their hard-earned money and their children’s futures. In Middlesex—London, the stories are the same. There are young couples unable to afford their first home, small business owners going bust because people cannot afford to go out anymore and seniors stretching fixed incomes to cover rising utilities. The people of Canada deserve better. They deserve a government that puts families first, respects taxpayers and focuses on the real priorities. They deserve affordable homes, lower costs at the pump and the grocery store, safer communities, and a strong, self-reliant Canada that stands on its own two feet. That is exactly what Conservatives would deliver. We would bring common sense back to Ottawa. We would make life more affordable for every Canadian family. We would cut taxes, build homes that Canadians need, fix the budget and unleash the energy and resources that power our prosperity. We would rebuild Canada, where the next generation could actually get ahead and not just get by. The choice before the House and before Canadians is clear. They can accept temporary gimmicks or demand a permanent solution. They can accept more debt or demand real relief. They can accept illusions or demand results. The Conservatives have chosen common sense. Will the Liberals listen to us?”

“The carbon tax is making farming much more expensive. Fuel and fertilizer cost too much, and the government adds too many rules. We should make it easier to grow food in Canada, not harder.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member’s question fails to address something I can speak to, as I am someone who works in the agriculture industry and works daily with people in the agriculture industry. I can say that, since the carbon tax was implemented in Canada, our costs have gone up exponentially. Every single input cost in this country has gone up, and that started long before any conflict started around the globe. I hear this from farmers every single day. Fuel costs are through the roof and fertilizer costs are through the roof. The government continues to pile on red tape and more bureaucracy that tie the hands of our producers, the ones who feed us. We should all be doing all we can to make sure it is easier to produce food in this country.”

“We need to cut taxes, cut red tape, and work with local governments. High fees and too many rules stop builders from making homes that young families can afford.”

“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very thoughtful question. Recently I have had the opportunity to sit down in London with homebuilders, developers and people who actually want to buy a home. I am hearing the same thing across my riding and across the country. We need to cut bureaucracy and red tape to make homes more affordable. Builders cannot build if they have to pay too many taxes. If the cost of a home now has hundreds of thousands of dollars in development charges, young families cannot afford to buy their first home. We need to work together with municipal governments to find a way to cut red tape, cut taxes and incentivize builders to build homes that Canadians can afford.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  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 →

“The government's plans do not do enough to help people with high costs. I want to know if the member's voters also see that the government is just pretending to help.”

“Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the member’s speech, and I want to just bring things back a bit. One part of her speech basically was about the shallow so-called half-measures, which is what we are calling them, of the Liberal government to provide relief for issues that it has caused. I am wondering if her constituents are seeing what mine are, that the reality does not match the illusion, the smoke and mirrors, of the government as it keeps pretending to be focused on Canadians and affordability.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 40 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 →
• Vague
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Clarity 43 of 100

  Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

  See full analysis →

“People in my riding cannot afford food and housing. Conservatives will keep fighting for everyday taxpayers and holding the government accountable.”

“Mr. Speaker, I hear from constituents every day. Tony from Denfield wrote to me and said, “The Prime Minister says that Canadians need to suffer for a little while. Why can’t the Liberals take half reduction in income so that they can feel the effects?” John from Newbury said, “Cost of living is too high. People cannot afford groceries, let alone housing. What happened to fiscal responsibility? Tired of being forgotten.” Ted from Putnam says, “Please keep fighting for the everyday taxpayer, and never forget who pays the bills. It seems like the other parties have forgotten where the buck stops.” Well, I could not agree more with that. Conservatives will continue fighting every day to make sure that Canadians are not forgotten and that we hold this Liberal government to account.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The government's bad policies weakened Canada's power grid. Now we have to buy electricity from other countries for the first time in decades. The member helped cause this problem, so I want to know why she thinks she can fix it.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the whole issue of a new electricity system across Canada to double our electricity. The thing I like best about this approach is that for years, the government, including this member, who has been here for years, as I have faced her for over six years now, has hobbled our electricity system across this country. Now it is flying in at the last minute saying, “Oh my gosh, we don’t have enough electricity in Canada,” because we are actually importing electricity in Canada right now for the first time in decades, as a result of failed policies. It is now coming in as if it is the saviour and saying, “I get to fix this.” Well, if someone is an arsonist, they get to put out the fire. Can I ask the member how she thinks she is going to solve something that she actually helped the government create, as opposed to turning it over to people who actually know how to solve something?”