Business of Supply

A Conservative opposition day motion asking the House to recognize that the Liberals have been in power for 11 years and that Canada is in an affordability crisis, with the Prime Minister urged to take responsibility. Conservatives said housing, food, and fuel costs are out of reach, taxes and fuel costs are driving up prices for farmers and families, and young people cannot afford homes or find work. Liberals pointed to government affordability measures such as child care, dental care for seniors, home energy retrofits, and housing projects, and said global factors like wars and U.S. tariffs are also driving prices, with no need for austerity. The Bloc Québécois criticized government deficits and spending on an oil pipeline and promoted a bill to extend a 10% Old Age Security pension increase to seniors aged 65 to 74, while the NDP supported the motion but pressed the Conservatives to bring forward concrete proposals to vote on. Some time went to exchanges over whether members would say directly whether an affordability crisis exists, and to questions about temporary foreign workers and Canadian steel procurement.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

105 statements

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“I want the House to pass my motion. It says the Liberals have run the country for 11 years and life in Canada costs too much. Homes, gas, and food are far too expensive, and the Prime Minister must take responsibility for 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

moved: That the House officially recognize that: (a) the Liberals have been in power for 11 years; and (b) Canada is in an affordability crisis. He said: Madam Speaker, he just got here. Yesterday, in the House of Commons, I asked the Prime Minister why Canada has the highest number of people who believe they will never be able to buy a home. Of the 22 countries surveyed by Habitat for Humanity, why does Canada have the worst record when it comes to home ownership? The Prime Minister said it is not his fault because he just got here. He has been Prime Minister for 18 months, a year and a half. What is more, he was an economic adviser to the Liberal government for five years. He has been here and has been part of the government for six and a half years, yet he says he just got here. Apparently, young couples who cannot afford to buy a home and whose rent has doubled over the course of the Liberal reign should not be asking the Prime Minister any questions. It is not his fault; he just got here. Single mothers who now have to choose between paying the mortgage and buying groceries need to stop asking the poor Prime Minister questions, because he just got here. According to the president and CEO of Habitat for Humanity Canada: Canada’s housing crisis has become an opportunity crisis. When people are sacrificing food, savings, and peace of mind to afford housing, they can never get ahead. They can’t build the futures they want for themselves and their children. These children need to stop asking the Prime Minister questions. He just got here. It is not his fault. It is going to take many years and plenty of lofty promises, while prices keep going up for everyone. Then there is the price of gas. I have already shown that the housing crisis has nothing to do with the global situation, because homes are built here, on Canadian soil, by Canadian workers, using Canadian materials, so it cannot be a global problem. The problem is here, in Canada, under the Liberal government. The same goes for diesel. Yes, there are wars going on in Iran, Russia and Ukraine, but that does not explain why the price of diesel and gasoline is about 10% to 15% higher here in Canada than in the United States and other countries. As of October 5, diesel costs about 26¢ more per litre than the U.S. average and 23¢ more than the world average. According to Statistics Canada, in August 2026, the price of gasoline was up 23% year over year, while prices for heating oil and other fuels were up 44%. This latter category refers to heating fuel, not an inflation rate for diesel. I will be sharing my time with the member for King—Vaughan. She will demonstrate that food affordability is worse than ever as we head into Thanksgiving. Since the Prime Minister took office last year, since he promised to be judged by the cost of a basket of groceries, we have seen a 10% increase in the cost of groceries and a Thanksgiving meal, but we are not supposed to blame him because he just got here. According to PwC, 69% of Canadians expect to cut back on their Christmas spending. Santa Claus, who happens to be Canadian, will have to spend less because, after a year and a half of this Prime Minister, the groceries he buys for himself and his wife are too expensive. Santa and Mrs. Claus are spending too much on groceries under this Prime Minister, which means fewer gifts for the children. According to the OECD, Canada has had the highest or second-highest food inflation in the G7 for 10 months straight. We cannot blame the rest of the world. We cannot simply scare people by spreading panic over foreign events when food prices here in Canada are far worse than in other countries. A new survey released today by Second Harvest found that about one in three of the food banks or shelters in its network are having to turn away people in need due to limited resources. We were told that food banks that do not have the resources to feed the hungry should stop asking the Prime Minister questions because he just got here. That is not what leadership and taking responsibility is about. A prime minister needs to keep his promises and take action to lower the cost of living. Our mission, as Conservatives, is to help people save money and to leave more money in their pockets for groceries and housing so that they can provide for their children and families. We have a plan to reduce government spending and lower the cost of living so that people can save money. Before we can solve a problem, we have to recognize that it exists. That is why, today, the Conservatives are asking the Prime Minister to acknowledge that Canada is in an affordability crisis that is affecting all Canadians. He can either vote in favour of this motion and thus recognize that we are in an affordability crisis after 18 months under his leadership or he can show that he is completely out of touch with what Canadians are dealing with. We, the Conservatives, will continue to fight to help people save money in Canada. That is our mission. We are going to restore the promise of Canada that anybody who works hard can aspire to a good life. The Prime Minister just got here. That is what he told us yesterday when I asked him why Habitat for Humanity found that more Canadians have given up on home ownership than the people in the 22 countries who were polled by it. In other words, the dream of home ownership is further out of reach in Canada than in any other country of the 22 nations surveyed. I asked him why. He said he knew it was terrible, but he just got here. Habitat for Humanity has said that Canada’s housing crisis has become an opportunity crisis. When people are sacrificing food, savings and peace of mind to afford housing, they can never get ahead. However, we must stop blaming the Prime Minister because he just got here. Housing is 100% a domestic sector that is not affected by tariffs, Trump or any other thing he wants to fearmonger over. I know he wants to talk about division and danger, but 100% of the land, 100% of the workers and 90% of the materials that go into homes are right here in Canada. It is Trump-proof, tariff-proof and a 100% homemade problem. That is why he could not use the foreign excuse he usually uses. Instead, he says that he just got here. It has been 18 months since he became the Prime Minister who was promising affordable homes. Most of his front bench cabinet have been here for 11 years, but they doubled housing costs and say that they just got here. Then there are the gasoline prices. Yes, the world price has gone up, but not as much as it has here in Canada. We are paying 10% a litre more than the U.S. We are paying 26% more per litre than the U.S. when it comes to diesel and 23¢ more than the world average. Only the Prime Minister’s beloved Europe is paying more for diesel than Canada. Stats Canada says that gasoline prices have increased 23% year over year. Much of that increase is being passed on in higher grocery prices, which brings me to Thanksgiving. I wish members a happy Thanksgiving. However, I am afraid that, just like me, they are going to have a very unpleasant trip down the grocery aisle when they look at the prices of serving a beautiful Thanksgiving meal to their family. The cost is up 10% in one year since the member became the Prime Minister, but again, he just got here. It has been a year since he looked Canadians in the eye on his first day on the job and told them to judge him by the prices at the grocery store. The judgment is in and Canadians are cutting back. In fact, one in three food banks is turning people away because it has run out of food. One in four shelters is turning people back out on to the cold streets. Those people who are homeless and hungry and those empty food banks have to stop asking the Prime Minister questions because he just got here after all. The Prime Minister is out of touch. Canadians are out of money. We are in this to save them money. That is why today we are calling on Parliament to recognize officially that Canada is in an affordability crisis. Will the government join us in that recognition or show that it is completely out of touch? It has to recognize a problem to fix a problem, and that fix is to save people money. Let us make Canada the most affordable country anywhere on earth.

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

Liberal
“The Prime Minister has worked to make life more affordable since the last election. He has been in office for about 500 days, while the Conservative leader has been in Parliament for over 8,000 days. The Prime Minister has gotten more done in his short time. I want to know why the Conservative leader keeps voting against our help for families.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, this motion is truly amazing, and I will have a chance to talk about it shortly. The leader of the official opposition needs a reality check. The affordability issue is something the Prime Minister has been commenting on, and delivering on for Canadians since the last federal election. The Prime Minister was first elected as a member of Parliament just over 500 days ago. Let us contrast that to the 8,000-plus days that the leader of the Conservative Party has been in the House. I have no problem at all doing a comparison between the things that this Prime Minister has done in 500 days and what the Leader of the Opposition has done in over 8,000 days. Why does the leader of the Conservative Party continue to oppose Liberal Party initiatives on the issue of affordability?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“We oppose this government because they have made everything more expensive. The Prime Minister makes announcements about grocery prices, but they do not help Canadians buy food. We are fighting to make life affordable.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 41 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, we oppose them, because they have made everything more expensive. That is a very simple answer to a very foolish question. Now, as for the Prime Minister, the member is right. He has been Prime Minister for 500 days. He has, in the words of the member, commented about affordability for 500 days. Has he ever commented. He has had five different grocery price affordability announcements. If Canadians could put announcements on their dinner table or fill their grocery cart with comments, then every stomach would be full in Canada. We need food. We need affordability. That is what we are fighting for.

Mario Simard, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets

Bloc Québécois
“I support this motion. The cost of living, housing, and food is too high after 11 years of this government. I agree with the Conservative leader that the government gives too much public money to big oil companies. I want him to talk more about the government's plan to spend $44 billion on a pipeline while people are struggling.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 43 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

Madam Speaker, I have occasionally spoken harshly of the leader of the official opposition in the past, but I am beginning to see him in a new light. I find what he has to say very interesting, and I quite like today’s motion. This government has indeed been in power for 11 years. The cost of living situation is atrocious, and so is access to home ownership, as the leader of the official opposition clearly demonstrated. Rising food prices are an issue. What has the government done in the past 11 years? For starters, it bought the Trans Mountain pipeline for $34 billion. Now it wants spend $44 billion in public money to build another pipeline. The leader of the official opposition hit the nail on the head when he called these big oil companies corporate welfare recipients. That is why I am beginning to see him in a new light. I completely agree with him. Can he speak to the Liberals’ misguided plan to spend $44 billion on a pipeline when people are struggling to put a roof over their heads and food on the table?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“The Liberal government has made so many rules and taxes that nothing can get built without public money. Energy projects can make money on their own. We do not want government subsidies. We want faster permits, lower taxes, and no public money handed to businesses.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I find it unfortunate that, after 11 years of Liberal government, after all the anti-development laws and taxes the Liberals have created, it takes tax dollars to build anything. Of course, pipelines and other oil and energy infrastructure are extremely profitable without any help from the government. The problem here in Canada is that there are so many obstacles put in place by the government that the state has to take over control from industry and fund the projects using tax dollars, which is a tragedy. That is the consequence of the Liberals’ anti-development policies. We do not want subsidies. We want a free market with speedy permitting, very low taxes and no corporate welfare for any industry.

Harb Gill, Windsor West

Conservative
“Canadians want to rely on their own paycheques, but in Windsor, wages do not cover basic living costs anymore. Hard-working people used to be able to afford a home, feed their families, and live in safe neighbourhoods. I want the Leader of the Opposition to explain what happened to that promise.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, Canadians are a proud people, and they are not looking for another government cheque. Windsorites are asking why their own paycheque will not go far enough. Could the Leader of the Opposition explain what happened to the basic bargain, that if Canadians work hard, pay their taxes and play by the rules, they should be able to afford a home, feed their family, get ahead and live in a safe neighbourhood? What happened to that bargain?

Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Opposition

Conservative
“The Liberal government has made life too expensive for Canadians. People cannot afford food, heat, or housing. I want members to vote for this motion to admit that Canada is in an affordability crisis so we can fix it.”
  • 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

    “The Liberals are costing Canadians more.”

    Said 3 times by 2 members since September 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, 11 years of Liberal government happened to that bargain. It is very simple. The Liberals are costing Canadians more. They are all talk and no results. The Liberal Prime Minister is out of touch and Canadians are out of money. His money is out of the country, in offshore tax havens and in the United States, while Canadians cannot afford to eat, heat or house themselves. However, to fix a crisis, the Liberals have to recognize it exists. To show that they are in touch, they have to vote in this House for this motion that Canada is in an affordability crisis, one that we must act to fix now.

Anna Roberts, King—Vaughan

Conservative
“I want the House to pass this motion saying Canada is in an affordability crisis. High prices for rent, groceries, and mortgages are hurting seniors and families. The government spends too much money on consultants and foreign aid. It needs to cut spending and help Canadians first.”
  • 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

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this House on behalf of the residents of King—Vaughan. Today, we are discussing something Canadians already understand because they are living it every day. Canada is in an affordability crisis. I hear it constantly in my community: Seniors worry about how long their savings will last; families are spending more on groceries and housing; and young people wonder whether owning a home will ever be possible. A senior in my riding of King—Vaughan recently shared her story with me. Maria could no longer afford her home, so she had to move. She now rents a basement apartment from another senior who relies on the rental income to help pay her mortgage and household expenses, but the homeowner is struggling too. Even with Maria paying rent, she worries she may no longer be able to afford the house. If that happens, Maria will have to move again. This is the financial reality facing two seniors in my community. One has already been forced out of her home, while the other is worried about losing hers. After working hard, paying taxes and contributing to this country their whole lives, this should not be what retirement looks like. As shadow minister for seniors, I regularly hear from Canadians living on fixed incomes who are struggling to keep up with the rising costs. We see the consequences at food banks across this country. In King—Vaughan, organizations like the King Township Food Bank and Vaughan Food Bank are doing incredible work supporting those in need. I am grateful for their volunteers, but we should be concerned that so many Canadians now depend on their services. Seniors, working families and Canadians with jobs are turning to food banks because they simply cannot make ends meet. The affordability crisis is also taking a serious toll on younger Canadians. For many, the question is no longer when they will buy their first home, but whether they will ever be able to afford one. Statistics Canada reports that the average asking rent for a two-bedroom apartment in the Toronto area was $2,650 a month in the second quarter of this year. That is more than $31,000 annually before groceries, transportation and other necessities. It is no wonder young adults are staying at home longer and parents are helping their adult children financially. A recent RBC survey found that more than half of Canadian parents with adult children between the ages of 18 and 40 provided financial support over the past year, contributing an average of more than $6,100. These parents are supporting their children while facing rising costs themselves in preparing for retirement. For existing homeowners, another challenge comes when their mortgages are up for renewal. This is something I understand from my previous career. Before entering politics, I spent many years in banking as a branch manager and mortgage specialist. I remember working with families in the 1980s, as mortgages came up for renewal and suddenly their payments became much harder to afford. Let us remember who was the prime minister in 1980. We will all remember that it was Mr. Trudeau. These were people who had jobs, made their payments and worked hard to provide for their families; then renewal time came, and they were left wondering whether they could keep the home they had worked so hard to buy. I remember the stress those conversations caused. Today, I am concerned that history is beginning to repeat itself. Canadians who took up mortgages several years ago are renewing under very different conditions. Even a few hundred dollars more each month can quickly strain a household budget. For some, that means cutting into savings or reducing spending on necessities. For others, it means questioning whether they can afford their home at all. I have seen what that does to families, and I do not want Canada to repeat that experience. This weekend, Canadians will celebrate Thanksgiving. For many families, that means driving to visit parents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, friends and relatives, but in the Toronto area, gas is now roughly 50¢ a litre more expensive than at this time last year. For families already struggling with rising costs, another tank of gas is one more expense to consider. Some may decide they simply cannot afford the trip. Canadians should not have to think twice on whether they can afford to spend Thanksgiving with their loved ones. The Prime Minister gave Canadians a clear standard by which to judge his government. He said Canadians would judge him by the prices they see at the grocery store. Let us apply that standard. Statistics Canada reported that grocery prices are 29% higher than in August 2021. Food Banks Canada recorded 2.2 million visits in March 2025, almost doubling the number in 2019. Nearly one in five food bank users was employed. By the Prime Minister’s own standard, the record is clear. After 11 years of Liberal government, Canadians are paying more for the basics while the Liberals continue spending heavily on bureaucracy, outside consultants, corporate subsidies and foreign aid. Billions of dollars continue to be committed outside of Canada. I was raised by my wonderful grandparents. They taught me to be compassionate. If someone needed help, we helped them. However, they also taught me that we have to make sure our own house is in order first. Canada is a generous country, and we should be, but there must be a sense of priority. When seniors like Maria are worried about losing their housing, young Canadians cannot afford their first home, and working families rely on food banks, the government must put Canadians first. Conservatives have reviewed federal spending and identified $150 billion in potential savings, including from bureaucracies, consultants, corporate welfare, foreign aid and other expenditures. That represents almost $10,000 per Canadian family. Families must make difficult financial decisions every single day. When household budgets get tight, they examine their spending, determine what is essential and find ways to save. The federal government should be expected to demonstrate that same discipline. Every dollar the Liberal government spends was earned by a hard-working taxpayer. It could be a construction worker, a farmer, a small business owner, a young Canadian saving for a home or a senior who worked for decades to build a retirement. That money deserves to be treated with respect. After 11 years of Liberal government, Canadians should not be working hard and making responsible decisions only to wonder whether they can afford groceries, housing or their next mortgage payment. Young people deserve a realistic path to home ownership. Families should be able to afford the basics. Seniors should be able to retire with dignity and security. The people I represent in King—Vaughan are facing the same pressures as Canadians from coast to coast. The Liberals need to start listening to Conservatives, get spending under control, put Canadians first and focus on making life more affordable here at home. Canadians have done their part. It is time for the government to do its part. That is why I am supporting this motion.

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

Liberal

Linked statement

“The Conservatives say they care about making life more affordable. I want the member to explain why they vote against our plans to help people with costs.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, as we talk throughout the day about what has taken place since Canadians elected a new prime minister less than 18 months ago, it is important that we look at what the Conservative Party has done as an opposition, at the degree to which it continues to oppose affordability measures that we bring forward and to stand in the way of building a stronger and healthier Canada. Can the member clearly indicate why the Conservative Party votes against affordability measures while its members talk about the need for affordability measures?

Anna Roberts, King—Vaughan

Conservative
“The government is not listening to Canadians who cannot afford enough food. The Liberals have not made life affordable. They waste money abroad instead of helping Canadian families.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 40 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 41 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

Madam Speaker, I have to admit that my colleague is out of touch. He is not listening to Canadians in this country. He is not listening to Maria. He is not listening to the seniors who cannot afford to eat three meals a day. They are lucky if they can afford one meal a day. Where is the affordability that the Liberals have created? They have not. They continue to spend money foolishly, sending it abroad without thinking about the children and the parents who want to feed their families and not have handouts.

Gord Johns, Courtenay—Alberni

NDP
“We support this motion, but the Conservatives should offer real solutions. We have crises in housing, mental health, and family doctors. Instead of just talking about the problems all day, the Conservatives should propose fixes for us to vote on.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the motion before us cites that the Liberals have been in power for 11 years and that Canada is in an affordability crisis. Well, of course we support the motion, but the opposition’s role is to hold government to account and also to be propositional. Opposition days are precious. They are an opportunity for the opposition to bring forward good proposals and force Parliament to vote on them. Right now, we have a mental health crisis and a housing crisis. We have six million people who are not attached to a doctor. The Conservatives talk about treatment and recovery. We support that, but they have no proposal on how to fix it. Why are the Conservatives tying up the House all day without bringing forward a propositional solution to solve the problems that they outlined? I appreciate them outlining the problems, but—

Anna Roberts, King—Vaughan

Conservative
“We should cut taxes, including on diesel and for single seniors. We cannot afford to lower taxes because the government is spending too much money.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am not sure whether the member was in the House this week, but we were discussing the opportunity to cut the diesel tax. We discussed cutting taxes abroad. We have single seniors who are paying 10 times more in taxes than a couple earning the same amount of money. We expect those taxes to go down, but as long as the Liberal government continues to blow our money, we are never going to be able to afford it.

Connie Cody, Cambridge

Conservative
“Seniors on fixed incomes cannot get a raise when food and heat cost more. Inflation is wiping out the money they saved. Does the member agree that government overspending is hurting seniors in retirement?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for her wonderful speech and for her good work with seniors. Seniors on fixed incomes cannot negotiate a raise when groceries and heating go up. Many seniors spent their lives saving responsibly, only to watch inflation take away those savings. Does the member agree that the government’s deficit spending negatively impacts a senior’s retirement?

Anna Roberts, King—Vaughan

Conservative
“Seniors cannot afford a secure retirement because of government spending. The Liberals waste taxpayers' money, and hard-working Canadians have to pay that debt back.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, last week I had to sit down with a group of seniors who said to me, “You know, Anna, when we came to this country, we were promised a future. We were promised an opportunity to be able to retire with security and dignity.” That is not happening today, and the reason it is not happening is that seniors are expected to live on a budget. We have to make the difference between spending and understanding how much that budget is going to cost us at the end of the month. Liberals have no idea. They continue to spend hard-working taxpayers’ dollars so foolishly that they do not understand the money has to be paid back. Who has to pay it back? It is the hard-working taxpayer.

Elizabeth May, Saanich—Gulf Islands

Green
“I agree with the motion. If we are going to waste a day debating, we should debate holding Elon Musk accountable instead. He said three Canadian provinces should separate. Since he wants to live on Mars, we should vote to send him there.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague from Courtenay—Alberni that there is nothing to vote against in the motion. I wonder, if we are going to have a day spent debating something foolish, if the member for King—Vaughan would agree with me that since we have more billionaires in Canada than ever, we should hold the world’s first trillionaire to account. Elon Musk said yesterday that Alberta, Saskatchewan and Quebec should separate. I wonder if we could get a day’s debate, thanks to the Conservatives, that since Elon Musk wants to live on Mars, we pass a resolution that we send him there as soon as possible.

Anna Roberts, King—Vaughan

Conservative
“Canadians are struggling to afford life. I want the House to cut taxes before Thanksgiving.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I cannot speak for what Elon Musk wants to do, but I can tell the member one thing. The Conservatives on this side of the House are concerned about Canadians. Every single one of us, in every single one of our ridings, hears about the importance of affordability. Our concern right now is to give them a Thanksgiving and cut the taxes. Let us make it happen for everybody.

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

Liberal
“I do not support this Conservative motion. Our government has cut taxes, ended the carbon tax, helped first-time homebuyers, and created school food and dental programs. Conservatives complain about high costs, but they vote against all of these things. We are also building the economy by breaking down trade barriers between provinces and working with Indigenous leaders.”
  • A repeated line

    “We introduced the Canada groceries and essentials benefit.”

    Said 29 times by 19 members since April 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I have quite a bit to say about the motion that the opposition has brought forward. I kind of wish I had more time on it, quite frankly, because there is so much there. We as a government are very much listening to what Canadians are saying. We are listening and taking action. That is a very important thing to say at the outset, because virtually from day one, we have been bringing forward programs to deal with the affordability issue in Canada. Canada is not alone in dealing with affordability issues. As a government, led by the Prime Minister, we are addressing the issue head-on. I am going to list things we are doing to accommodate that. Before I get into that, though, I will provide a bit of commentary. I have been around Parliament Hill for a number of years now, much like the leader of the Conservative Party, and never before have I seen this. I do not know how best to describe it. Is it laziness? I do not know what drove the Conservative Party to bring forward this opposition motion. The Green Party leader just indirectly made light of it, but it is true. There really is zero merit to this opposition motion. I like to think that the members of the opposition could be a bit more creative. Conservatives talk about how long the Liberals have been in government. Let me tell them how long it has been since the Prime Minister was elected on April 28, 2025. That is 500 days. Contrast that to the over 5,000 days that the Leader of the Opposition has been around. If Conservatives want to do a comparison, I will do that. I will provide a detailed comparison so the people following this debate will better understand the degree of silliness and lazy opposition we see across the way and will see that we on the government benches are not only listening to what our constituents are saying but bringing their ideas and thoughts to the House of Commons, and actually acting on issues such as affordability. I challenge the leader of the Conservative Party on why the Conservatives continue to vote against Liberal initiatives dealing with affordability while at the same time being critical of the government for not taking actions on affordability. The Conservative Party does not make any sense. It really and truly does not. We can stop and think about how Conservatives behave inside the chamber and their voting patterns. On the one hand, they say they are concerned about affordability and are listening to Canadians. Let me give a good, tangible example. I have raised this one in the past. The Prime Minister and the government made a commitment to the children of Canada, 400,000 children. We are now making the national school nutrition program permanent. That program will provide food for the tummies of 400,000 children across the country. What kind of response have we gotten from the Conservative Party? We have had Conservatives call it a garbage program. We have had them say it is a non-existent program and that children are not being fed, but I can tell the House that it is having a real, tangible impact in every member’s constituency. As I have said before, this is not a new issue. It has been an issue since I was first elected to the Manitoba legislature, back in 1988. We have a Prime Minister who has seen the merit of having this and bringing it in as part of affordability, ensuring that children are able to learn with some nutritious food as a part of their diet. There were many situations, even back in the eighties and nineties, when children were going to school on an empty stomach. We are doing two things at the same time, and the Conservatives voted against them. Let us look at another initiative to give a break and deal with affordability. There is the program for first-time homebuyers, which got rid of the GST. That is a substantial saving for those individuals looking at purchasing a home for the first time. It does two things. One is make it more affordable. The other is help build a stronger economy through our construction industry. That means more Canadian lumber and Canadian steel. It means having more engagement with our skilled labour and unionized workers. I could talk about the dental program and how many seniors on fixed incomes have benefited from that particular program. These are seniors living in every member’s riding across the country. That helps in terms of disposable income. It makes life more affordable. As with the school program, the Conservatives continue to vote against programs such as that. We have the groceries and essentials benefit. It is a program that puts a substantial increase of money into the pockets of individuals who are at the middle and lower-end income levels, more so than the multi-millionaires in our society, to deal with the affordability issue. Members of the Conservative Party talk about tax breaks. This Prime Minister and this government have delivered on tax breaks. The very first action taken by our Prime Minister was getting rid of the carbon tax. That was the first action by this Prime Minister under a new government following the election results in April last year. If we fast-forward to the spring economic update, there was the excise tax relief on gasoline. There is a great deal of benefit, and it is not only on the issue of affordability. Canadians have recognized that one of the ways we can support the Canadian economy is by looking and travelling around Canada. Indirectly, it not only helps with the affordability issue but also encourages and promotes interprovincial and provincial travel for vacations and things of that nature. There are a number of initiatives. I did not mention the income tax break from 15% to 14%, but now I will. There are 22 million Canadians who benefited from that tax break. Those are initiatives that deal with just affordability, and they are not all of the initiatives, but all of them have taken place since we got a new Prime Minister and a new government for the people of Canada. A member opposite asked if I just got here. I guess I have a lot of similarities with the leader of the Conservative Party. Both the leader of the Conservative Party and I have been around for a long time. That is why I do not have a problem doing a comparison between the leader of the Conservative Party and the Prime Minister of Canada, who has been around for less than a year and a half. I have no problem at all doing that. I will now go on to the second stage. I just talked about the issue of affordability. Do members want to talk about what has taken place? With the issue of affordability, we have the short term and the long term. The long term might be, for example, pharmacare or the dental program, or the national food program being made permanent by this Prime Minister. There is a whole new area with regard to what we are doing to build an economy that works for all Canadians. Again, we have a Prime Minister and a government focused on building a stronger, healthier Canadian economy. Unlike what the Conservative leader says, it is not just words. Just as I illustrated regarding affordability, there are tangible actions putting money into the pockets of Canadians and increasing their disposable income. There are also tangible actions by this government and this Prime Minister that are building a stronger, healthier Canadian economy and society. This is not by choice. All we have to do is look at the last federal election. If the Conservatives were listening to their constituents, they would have found out what I and every member of the Liberal caucus found out, which is that they are concerned about Donald Trump, tariffs and trade. These are things we should all be concerned about. At the very least, I can assure those who are listening that the government has been focused on them from day one. I ask members to tell me the last time we saw a prime minister work as collaboratively with the provinces and indigenous leaders collectively, as well as other stakeholders, as we have seen this Prime Minister work over the last 18 months. I have been around, as I said, since 1988, starting in the Manitoba legislature, and there has not been a prime minister who has worked as collaboratively with stakeholders in my time as a parliamentarian. The results are there, and we continue to move forward. We have been talking about Bill C-39. There has been a great deal of debate on Bill C-39. This bill is a very important aspect of the government’s long-term and short-term agenda, because we made a commitment to Canadians that we were going to not only deal with the issue of affordability but build Canada for the future. We are talking about jobs for today and jobs for tomorrow to continue to make Canada the best country in the world to call home. What have we done? We can take a look at some of the Prime Minister’s very first actions. Even before he took his seat in the House physically, he was meeting and talking with premiers and trying to build that sense of collaboration that is necessary to be able to expand trade opportunities beyond the Canada-U.S.A. border. Let us take a look at the mandate letters. Ministers in our front benches and others, even members of the Liberal caucus in the backbenches, are all on the same page. That page is to look at ways we can expand and grow Canada’s economy and at the same time protect our environment, making sure that we are doing it in the right way, protecting indigenous rights and working collaboratively. The results are there. They are tangible We took down the federal barriers. There should be one Canadian economy. The federal barriers have been taken down to facilitate more trade between our provinces and territories. Even today, we continue to work with and encourage the provinces to do likewise and take down those interprovincial trade barriers that they need to. That has been a very high priority for this Prime Minister. We then passed Bill C-5 to allow major projects to get up and running. If we listen to the Conservatives and the silliness that comes over from them, they say we have not built any major projects, but they built 20,000 projects. What a bunch of garbage. Let us think about it. They say they built 20,000 projects. How many of them were over $1 billion? What sort of collaboration took place between the provinces, indigenous people and stakeholders to develop major projects over $1 billion? When you talk about 20,000 projects, I am working on projects. I want the Seven Oaks General Hospital—

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

Liberal
“Our government is building a strong economy. We are backing major projects across the country worth nearly half a trillion dollars, attracting huge foreign investments, and signing new trade deals. At the same time, I am pushing for federal and provincial support to expand our local community centre and restore emergency hospital services in my riding. We should vote against this motion.”
  • Speech on a motion

    Relevance 4 of 100

    None of this speech addressed the specific motion under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, that was a rookie mistake. I talk about issues in my own riding. I would like the Tyndall Park Community Centre to get an expansion. I would like to see the Seven Oaks General Hospital get its emergency services restored. I am going to fight to ensure that it does. I am convinced that I will get the federal government to step up, and I want to see the province also step up on that issue. If we take a look at health care, there are thousands of projects that the federal government is working on that will lead to houses being built, hospital capital investment and infrastructure across the province. What we are talking about in addition to that are the major projects worth multiple billions of dollars, not millions of dollars. That is what we passed shortly after the last federal election. Over the summer, we created the Major Projects Office, where there are more than a couple of dozen projects. When we take a look at the projects, we are talking about, for example, LNG in the province of British Columbia. We are talking about copper mines in the province of Saskatchewan. We are talking about nuclear energy expansion in the province of Ontario. We are talking about the expansion of ports in Montreal. We are talking about mines in Atlantic Canada. We are talking about infrastructure and transportation expansion in northern Canada. We are talking about infrastructure in every region of the country. Those are major projects getting close to half a trillion dollars. Speaking of half a trillion dollars, let us think about when the Prime Minister of Canada hosted the world to get investment coming into Canada just last month. We saw premiers, indigenous leaders and many other stakeholders, along with multibillionaires and people who are responsible for billions of dollars of potential investment. It was a historic meeting, where Canada received, through an investment summit chaired by the Prime Minister, half a trillion dollars because of the relationships he has developed and the efforts of our ministers and members of the caucus. That is completely unheard of in Canadian history. I have not even talked about the issue of international trade. We have passed legislation for Indonesia, Northern Ireland and England. We have other deals in the works with the Philippines and India. We have 20 other trade and security agreements with other nations. This, and a whole lot more, has all been done in the last 500-plus days that Canada has had a new Prime Minister and a new government. This includes all of the initiatives that I talked about. That is why I say with confidence that I do not have a problem comparing the current Prime Minister to any other prime minister I have had the opportunity to work with in terms of growing a stronger and a healthier Canadian economy.

Gérard Deltell, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk

Conservative
“I totally disagree with the member. The Liberals spent ten years supporting policies like the carbon tax, and now they celebrate reversing them. I want him to admit that ten years of the former prime minister hurt Canada's economy.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the speech by my colleague, but obviously I totally disagree. I have to highlight that he put a lot of emphasis on the last 500 days of the Prime Minister. That is fine. We remember when the former prime minister was elected in 2015. Do members remember what the member did 10 years later? He was once supportive of the carbon tax, and now he is proud to say that the new Prime Minister cancelled the carbon tax, the flagship policy of the Liberal government. He has paid respect to that and has said that things are fantastic now that we have Bill C-5 and Bill C-39. It is exactly 180° from what they have done in the last 10 years. Does the member recognize that the 10 years under Trudeau destroyed the Canadian economy?

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

Liberal
“I disagree with the member. The Conservatives also changed their minds on the carbon tax when Erin O'Toole supported it. Our new Prime Minister listened to Canadians and decided to get rid of the carbon tax. The Conservatives should support that plan to build a stronger Canada.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the simple answer to that is no. I disagree with the member opposite. Having said that, since he wants to talk about the carbon tax, he should remember a fellow by the name of Erin O’Toole. Erin O’Toole was the leader of the Conservative Party, and Erin O’Toole supported a carbon tax. There was a change in the Conservative leadership, and it is not the first time that the Conservative Party changed its attitude towards the carbon tax. The Liberal Party selected a new leader. That new leader listened to Canadians and came out with a very strong statement dealing with the carbon tax, making the decision to get rid of it. I would think that the Conservative Party would support that idea. Canadians understand that there is a new Prime Minister and that Prime Minister has an agenda to build a stronger and healthier Canada.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 148

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 105 statements
  2. Government Orders Business of Supply 8 statements
  3. Statements by Members Latin American and Hispanic Day on the Hill 2 statements
  4. Oral Questions Finance 5 statements
  5. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  6. Oral Questions Government Priorities 6 statements
  7. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 13 statements
  8. Oral Questions Climate Change 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions Housing 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions Employment 4 statements
  11. Oral Questions Housing 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Agriculture and Agri-Food 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Public Safety 4 statements
  14. Oral Questions Democratic Institutions 8 statements
  15. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 6 statements
  16. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions The Economy 6 statements
  18. Oral Questions The Environment 2 statements
  19. Oral Questions Justice 2 statements
  20. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  21. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 4 statements
  22. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Business of the House 2 statements
  24. Government Orders Business of Supply 9 statements
  25. Private Members' Business Sergei Magnitsky International Anti-Corruption and Human Rights Act 15 statements
  26. Government Orders Business of Supply 8 statements
  27. Government Orders Business of Supply 42 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  29. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  30. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 6 statements