Ryan Turnbull
Whitby, Ontario · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, before I get started, I will just let you know that I will be sharing my time with the member for Beauport—Limoilou . I am pleased to rise today to debate Bill C-30 , which is an act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update tabled in Parliament on April 28.”
“This would provide a savings of 10¢ per litre on gasoline and four cents per litre on diesel from April 20, 2026, through to Labour Day. The bill would also extend the suspension of the excise tax to aviation fuel over the same period to help mitigate the very high costs of jet fuel.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is good to be here in the very last moments before the House rises for the summer. I know that there are a large number of farms in the member opposite's riding. There are farm succession plans all across this country, and farmers do struggle with succession, so I understand the issue the member is speaking about.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would just say that it has become apparent in the House, through question period and many of the proceedings, that the Conservatives claim that they are about protecting and supporting vulnerable people, but in fact, they just seem to use those people's hardship for political gain.”
“It includes suspending the excise tax on fuel and extending that to aviation fuel. It includes a cap on the excise tax for alcohol, wine, spirits and beer. Craft brewers have been asking for this. Obviously, it would be capped at 2% of the escalator on the excise tax on alcohol.”
“It is a measure I have supported from day one because it offers owners of businesses that are small- to medium-sized, or they could be larger, the opportunity, when they want to sell the business, to protect those businesses and also to hand them down to workers.”
The complete record
Every one of 604 lines we hold for Ryan Turnbull, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 13.
“Mr. Speaker, in relation to development charges, our government has incentivized municipalities to freeze or lower those development charges through the housing accelerator fund. All of those funds that go directly to municipalities are predicated on municipalities either freezing or lowering those charges to make it easier for developers to afford and to make the math work on new housing developments. That is exactly why we went forward with the housing accelerator fund. It was both to incentivize municipalities to build medium density but also to speed up the approvals and planning processes, and to lower or at least freeze development charges. Those things have been put in place.”
“The Conservative Party says we should just do nothing. Getting out of the way is basically synonymous with saying to do nothing and that the market will solve the problem itself. It will absolutely not do that. I fundamentally disagree. It is not socialism to have temporary government intervention. Intervention is responsible government. It is listening to the public, being sensitive to their needs and responding to those needs with smart policies that are going to get at the root causes of the problem. That is exactly what we are doing.”
“We have cut taxes. We have encouraged municipalities to move faster on approvals. We have used and leveraged federal lands to help get more housing built, and we are removing the cost of acquisition on that land and property to build those properties. We are doing all of that. We are also buying Canadian. There is the desire, which I think is shared by all Canadians, to utilize materials that are Canadian and use a Canadian workforce to build those homes. We are actually using every lever we can think of to decrease the price for the average consumer. The fact is that the market would not solve the problem. It is not building enough affordable and deeply affordable housing. That is exactly how we got into this mess over 30 years. Our government has done the lion's share of work with no help from the Conservative Party, which is a shame.”
“They actually talk down those investments in the House every single day and vote against them, and then they do not actually stand up to help their communities by getting those investments into their communities, which is a shame and actually making the problem worse. I would suggest that Conservative members use the programs and initiatives the federal government has put in place to help solve the problems in their communities instead of complaining about them. Our government has stepped up with Build Canada Homes, which has gone even further. It is a new approach. It is a new strategy. It is not based on central planning. It is based on what Canadians have told us across the country, which is that we need to build at scale. We need to adopt and embrace the new modernized construction methods that can really decrease the cost of housing.”
“I have evidence in my riding of 220-million dollars' worth of investments across my region that have repaired 1,838 housing units and built 1,236 new units, with 29,000 more over the next decade built into housing accelerator agreements, as well as 137 new shelter beds and 177 supportive and transitional housing units. That has all been built in my region. I have seen first-hand that delivering investments in my community through the federal programs that our government has put in place have made a substantive difference for people in my riding and the ridings adjacent to mine, with the exception of the Conservatives' ridings because they never advocate for those funds.”
“Mr. Speaker, very simply put, no, I do not agree with the member opposite. I do not agree with his assessment of the problem. I do not agree that the free market is actually going to solve the problem he is talking about. I think we have seen evidence of that with the federal government under Conservative leadership. It made no investment in housing for over a decade under Stephen Harper, and we saw the problem get worse and worse. Our government stepped up under previous leadership and created the national housing strategy.”
“Mr. Speaker, to the member opposite, yes, there are families in my riding purchasing homes that are in the average of $700,000 to $800,000, which I admit is a high price for a new home, but it is the case in many parts of where I live in the GTA, the greater Toronto area. Cutting the GST on new home purchases for homes under $1 million, which is what the policy does, is actually very beneficial. However, it is not the only thing we have done. We are also increasing housing supply through Build Canada Homes. I am sure I will get to talk more about housing with the next question. We have reduced mortgage insurance by 25%. We have amortized mortgages over 30 years to decrease payments. We have offered tax-free home savings accounts for the first purchase of a home.”
“Canada and China have reached an agreement to open up market access for canola and seafood, which is good news for many of our canola and seafood producers across Canada. Similarly, Canada and Japan signed a new comprehensive strategic partnership as well, and we have seen that the Port of Churchill just entered into an agreement with Belgium, one of the biggest—”
“We have seen that the Prime Minister and cabinet's attention to trade diversification is having an impact. Canada and India agreed to sign a new comprehensive economic partnership, doubling trade between the two countries to $70 billion a year. Canada and India signed a $2.6-billion agreement for Cameco in northern Saskatchewan to supply 22 million pounds of uranium for nuclear energy. Canada and India signed another strategic energy partnership focused on renewables: solar, wind, hydrogen and battery storage. Canada and Australia recently, with the biggest superannuation pension funds in Australia, agreed to boost investments in Canada by $10 billion over the next nine years.”
“Also, Canada's dollar has become a top pick in the $9.5-trillion-a-day foreign exchange market. Canada is projected by the IMF to have the second-strongest growth in the G7. Top economists in Canada actually had to revise their forecasts after budget 2025, and they revised them up to show that there would be growth in the economy. This is all despite being in a trade war, with tariffs obviously having a drag on the sales of our economy. The Canada pension plan, which is world-class, was just announced as second in the world. That is pretty impressive, I would say. Also, we have heard quite a lot from investors around the world who are looking at Canada as a place to invest their capital. With FDI up as a measure, we can see that that is actually realizing itself.”
“In budget 2025, we have also put in place tax breaks and tax incentives for businesses to boost productivity. The Bank of Canada governor has come to committee and confirmed that those tax incentives, including the investment tax credits but also all of the different capital investment tax breaks that we have offered to Canadian businesses, are going to help boost productivity. We are already seeing examples and signs within our economy that there is movement, and that for our manufacturing industries, for example, the PMI, the purchasing managers index, has been improving. It is at a 13-month high. We have seen that foreign investment in Canada has surged to the highest level since 2007, with net investment in Canada exceeding net outflows by $17.4 billion.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is great to be back in the House after a short time of being away. I was fortunate, and I will start by thanking my wonderful wife, who has delivered another baby girl to our family. That is our third girl. It is great to be back in the chamber and in debate with members opposite, whom I respect, even though I strongly disagree with the premise of the member's question. In response to the member, I would say that the government is actually doing a lot of the things that he is calling for. We have cut income tax by 1% in the lowest income tax bracket, which is saving dual-income families an average of $840 per year. We have cut GST on new home purchases of homes valued under $1 million, which will save families $50,000 on average. We have cut the carbon tax.”
“Mr. Speaker, we know that “Bah humbug” is just a name for the opposition leader 's management style. Thank God the human emotion of joy is not deductible, because the Conservatives would find a way to claw it back right before Christmas. They will not help us feed children in school. They will not help us build affordable housing. They will not help us give and to deliver to families a well-earned tax break before Christmas. What is next, the Christmas tree? Are they going to try to take that away too? Even the Grinch had the good sense to give people their presents back before Christmas. When will the Conservative Party stand up and actually support Canadians? They said they were “Canada first”, so why do they put Canadians last every chance they get?”
“Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member that the budget bill is full of really great measures for this country. One thing we can all acknowledge is that Canada has world-class innovators and entrepreneurs, those of whom will help us build the strongest economy in the G7. As part of that process, we are reducing red tape to broaden the use of something called regulatory sandboxes to help foster and spur research and development and innovation. We will do this in a responsible way and in a forward-looking way. In a temporary way, these will be authorizations that are limited, but they will help us keep up with the speed of innovation in this country.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is almost the holidays, with goodwill to all. The opposition leader says no, let us circle back next year after his leadership review. Meanwhile, hard-working Canadians wait for a well-earned tax break. They wait for a $50,000 tax cut for first-time homebuyers. Children wait for healthy meals at school. Families and seniors wait for affordable housing. In addition to that, this member will not even stand up in the House and support the health care infrastructure fund; this would build a hospital in the Durham Region, which is badly needed for families. He should be ashamed of himself.”
“The build communities strong fund and Build Canada Homes would help municipalities rapidly increase housing supply. For Whitby, that would unlock over 11,000 new units at our waterfront. I will keep—”
“Mr. Speaker, residents in Whitby, like communities across Canada, expect Parliament to pass the budget implementation act. Why? It will deliver the generational investments they have been asking for. That means parties opposite need to stop the procedural delays and stop blocking the affordable housing, health care and housing infrastructure Canadians rely on. This budget bill would advance the top priorities in my riding: affordable housing, waterfront redevelopment and long-overdue improvements to health care. It would help build the health care infrastructure families need so they can get care closer to home and shorter wait times. In Durham, that would mean real progress on the Whitby Hospital and our hospice in Whitby. Members opposite have already voted against $5 billion in health care infrastructure funding.”
“Mr. Speaker, I can assure members that in the preparations leading up to budget 2025, there was a comprehensive expenditure review that looked at all possible operational savings the federal government could make in order to invest in the Canadian economy. This will ensure that we have a capital budgeting framework that ensures we achieve capital formation; that we grow the Canadian economy; that we attract investment; that we diversify our trade; that we build infrastructure, defence capabilities and the housing that Canadians want; that we can defend our sovereignty; and that we can build an affordable future for all Canadians. That is exactly what this government is up to. We are building Canada strong.”
“Mr. Speaker, when our government moved forward with the first round of major nation-building projects, which would create tens of thousands of good-paying jobs and add to Canada's GDP and economic output, what did the Conservative leader say? He called those projects “pathetic”. He stood out there in the media and said that about projects that would create tens of thousands of jobs, yet here we are being lectured by the Conservatives today about good job numbers that exceeded expectations three months in a row. They cannot seem to even get their stories straight. Whose side are Conservatives on? Are they on the side of Canadians? Are they on the side of affordability?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is hard to take the Conservatives at their word in the House when they stand up every day to complain about the Canadian economy, while we receive good news on this side and rejoice in it. The economy is actually faring well. The IMF just came out with a report that said Canada's economy is weathering the shocks of the tariff war, or the trade war, better than expected. We have heard that message again and again. The numbers show the same thing with job numbers exceeding expectations three months in a row, real GDP growth and real wage growth over 33 months in a row. That is more money in the Canadian economy.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am proud to serve with the hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester. There is only one reason that key pieces of legislation are not moving through this House, and it is the opposition, which is blocking them in committee and in the House. It is wasting time and blocking key legislation. It is the opposition that is stopping the first-time homebuyer's tax savings of $50,000 for first-time home purchases. It is the opposition that is stopping the creation of tens of thousands of high-paying jobs. It is the opposition that is stopping the national school food program from feeding more hungry children—”
“Mr. Speaker, it appears the members opposite have spent so long on the opposition benches, and have become so disagreeable, that they cannot even agree with the things they have advocated for. It is a shame. There are things like tax cuts for 22 million Canadians, a GST cut of $50,000 on new home purchases for families, automated tax benefits and tax deductions for businesses so they can invest in themselves to boost their productivity and growth. That is what increases real wages relative to the cost of living. That is how families get ahead. That is how we support Canadians. Why do the Conservatives not get on board?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a shame the Conservatives have attached their political fortunes to the failure of the Canadian economy and the struggles of the Canadian people. They rejoice when our economy does badly. On this side of the House, we are looking for indicators and signs that our plan is working, and guess what. Today, we had another sign that our plan is working to build a strong Canadian economy, which was 54,000 new jobs added to our economy. This is 181,000 jobs added in just the last three months. Real GDP has grown faster than expectations. Inflation is within the Bank of Canada's target range—”
“Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that I do my own grocery shopping and all the cooking in my household as well. What is interesting is that Canadian families want an empathetic, compassionate government that actually acts on the challenges and struggles they are facing, not one that weaponizes their struggles for political gain. We are standing up for Canadians every day. We have offered an income tax cut for 22 million Canadians. We have cut child care fees by more than half, saving families $10,000 per year. The Canada child benefit puts hundreds of dollars into Canadians' pockets. That is how we feed families for generations to come.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to start with a quote from an infamous author and professor: “climate change is our agri-food sector's greatest challenge, and we need to address it.” Do we know who said that? It was Sylvain Charlebois, the food professor, on November 1, 2024, in response to my question at committee. What is interesting is that the members do not take the time to read the report. They will not acknowledge that climate change is real at their conventions. They have no plan to fight climate change, yet the very person they quote every day cites it as the greatest challenge for our food system that is increasing food prices—”
“Mr. Speaker, what feeds Canadian families are good-paying jobs and a strong social safety net, both of which the Conservatives oppose. They cannot even bring themselves to recognize when job numbers exceed expectations month over month over month. For three months in a row, the Canadian economy has added 181,000 new jobs, including 54,000 this month. We have seen a drop in the unemployment rate in this country. Conservatives cannot even acknowledge when the Canadian economy does well, because it does not fit their narrative.”
“Mr. Speaker, every farmer knows that we reap what we sow. What the Conservatives are sowing every day in this House is the distrust of Canadians, because they are insincere when they weaponize people's struggles for their political gain while voting against every single affordability measure that puts more money in Canadians' pockets. That includes an income tax cut for $22 million, the Canada child benefit, cutting the consumer carbon tax, child care, dental care and over $2,000 of support in direct benefits that put more money in the pockets of Canadians with young children. How can they say they are—”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Whitby fire service recruits class of 2025 on their graduation. The recruits powered through demanding training, long days, early mornings and more ladder drills than anyone should be able to brag about at family dinners. This week they joined one of the most respected fire services in the country, and they have earned every bit of this moment. I grew up in a family of first responders, so I learned that service is not a job but a duty. That same sense of duty is alive in each of the graduates. Firefighters step forward when others step back. They bring calm to chaos, and their work goes far beyond emergency calls. They support families and strengthen our community every single day. I thank the Whitby firefighter graduate class of 2025 for choosing this path.”
“Madam Speaker, I want to ask the member about his previous comment, in which he said that our government was resorting to ad hominem arguments. This is when someone attacks the person and has no actual logical argument, which is something Conservatives do in the House every day. They talk about the Prime Minister 's being disloyal to the country, and they berate immigrants as being the source of our economic troubles. Can the member opposite mention whether he has ever resorted to an ad hominem argument in the House and whether he actually believes that the Prime Minister of Canada is not working on behalf of this country?”
“Madam Speaker, we know that the Conservatives will talk down our industries and workers every chance they get. That may help generate clicks and fundraising emails, but it will not build Canada strong. While they are in the business of saying no, we are in the business of saying yes: yes to productivity tax deductions for businesses; yes to making it easier for Canadian companies to invest in machinery, equipment and technology to help them grow and thrive; and yes to catalyzing investments to supercharge productivity in Canada. When we say yes to Canada and to Canadians, Conservatives say no. Maybe that is why Canadians keep saying no every time the Conservatives—”
“Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the member what she cares about. Does she care about access to critical care and health care in our region? I wonder, because she voted against budget 2025, including the health care infrastructure fund, which would fund hospitals and health care facilities all across Canada, including in Durham region. Does she care about 21,700 jobs at the new nuclear project in Darlington? I wonder, because she voted against that as well. It is clear that she does not care about our region—”
“Madam Speaker, the member would rather question the loyalty of our Prime Minister , who is securing deals all around the world to drive investment into Canada and protect jobs and who is stepping up with packages of support for tariff-impacted industries. The member will not even stand up to support a hospital in Durham Region with the health care infrastructure funding that we put in the federal budget. He will not stand up to support a major project that will provide 1.2 million homes in our region with clean energy and 21,700 jobs. How can he say he cares about anybody but himself?”
“Madam Speaker, it is really challenging to take the Conservatives at their word when they are trying to purport to care about Canadians. They vote against everything with the word “care” in it: dental care, child care, pharmacare and even health care infrastructure to build hospitals in my community in Durham Region where the member is from. They will not even support that. If they want to show that they care, they should step up to support major projects in this country, like the new nuclear project at Darlington that will create 21,700 jobs in our region. The member voted against it.”
“Together, these wins say something very meaningful. Whitby is building a future that lives up to the hype and will be smart, sustainable and vibrant for generations to come.”
“Madam Speaker, Whitby is not just talking about sustainability; it is demonstrating action. At last week's Durham Greener Buildings awards, which recognizes success in achieving climate targets, with two awards, our community walked out with some serious hardware. First up is the Whitby Centennial Building, which earned the Best Emission and Energy Performance Award for Performing Arts. It proves we can honour our heritage while still hitting new heights in energy performance. Second is Whitby's sports complex, which also stepped up. It received a Leadership and Sustainability Impact Award, showing how a local recreational hub can and will lead the charge on environmental responsibility. Our government backed that vision with a $25-million investment through the green and inclusive community buildings fund. That is paying off.”
“I look forward to working on that with the member across the way, hopefully finding a way to get another private member's bill through the House of Commons. Again, I appreciate him for his good faith attempt to address an issue that he and many government members care about deeply.”
“The government believes that Bill C-230 is an important piece of legislation that could potentially strengthen financial reporting and transparency. I would like to again applaud the member for Simcoe North for advancing this legislation. One of the features of Private Members' Business is that it often advances priorities that have broad support in this House. In conclusion, in that spirit, as with any proposed legislation, it is essential to carefully examine the bill. Those of us in this House must consider not only its intent but also its practical implications for government operations, stakeholder interests and Canadians at large. Should the House vote in favour of this bill, I trust that we will do the work of scrutinizing it at the committee stage.”
“(1755) On this side of the House, we believe that the proposed $1-million threshold for reporting debts is also quite low. The government believes that this threshold would need to be increased in order to reduce the administrative burden of maintaining the registry. It would also follow the same materiality principles already used in government financial policies to help reduce the risk of reputational harm. For example, publicizing smaller writeoffs could discourage businesses from engaging with government programs. That being said, a new proposed registry must leverage existing reporting mechanisms so as not to strain resources and to remain consistent with current documents and procedures.”
“If an online public registry were to be established, it would need to draw a clearer distinction between debts that are written off and those that may be waived or forgiven, just as they are presented in the public accounts. The types of debts to be included in the registry would therefore need to be clarified. There are also potential privacy implications, as I have mentioned, with the legislation. The bill focuses on corporations, trusts and partnerships, and as a result, it does not identify individuals, which is a good thing. We support this. However, it is possible that in the case of partnerships, the name of an individual could be disclosed, in which case the Privacy Act could be engaged. The bill would therefore need to address these privacy concerns by explicitly prohibiting the disclosure of the names of any individuals.”
“I would note that this may have important privacy implications, as I think the sponsor of the bill has noted. However, the bill attempts to strike a balance between transparency and privacy. It is my hope and my belief that striking a correct balance will be one item we will discuss when examining the bill in even greater detail, because it is indeed a delicate balance that needs to be carefully assessed. While I believe that all members of the House support the high-level aims of the bill, I must raise a few concerns the government has with the proposed legislation. One issue is that the bill does not distinguish between a writeoff of a debt or obligation and a waiver or forgiveness.”
“Third, the debt must arise under an act of Parliament. Lastly, the debt must be waived, written off or forgiven in whole or in part. I would note that the bill does not propose to change the criteria or authority under which debts may be forgiven. Those decisions would continue to be made under existing laws and policies. In order to create this registry, the bill includes consequential amendments to several other acts, including the Income Tax Act, the Excise Tax Act, the Excise Act, the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, the Digital Services Tax Act and the Global Minimum Tax Act. However, these amendments would provide the CRA and other relevant bodies with the ability to share confidential taxpayer information with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat for the purpose of populating the registry.”
“At its core, the bill aims to make government finances more open and accountable, particularly when large debts owed to the federal government are cancelled or forgiven. One of the ways it proposes to do this is by creating a public registry showing major financial obligations owed to the government by corporations, trusts and partnerships that have been forgiven or settled without full repayment. However, the bill would require specific conditions to be met before a debt can be included in the registry, which is important. First, a debt must be owed by a corporation, trust or partnership. This means that the registry would focus on significant financial obligations involving organizations. Second, the current iteration of the legislation notes that the debt must be valued at $1 million or more.”
“Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-230 , an act to amend the Financial Administration Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts. I want to thank the member for Simcoe North for putting this forth. I, too, share some of the core values that I think are expressed in the bill, one of which is a commitment to tax fairness. That is very important to me, as is a commitment to transparency and accountability. That is why our government put forward the national anti-fraud strategy recently, as well as committing to a financial crimes agency, among some other commitments we have made. Some of the legislative efforts and initiatives of our government demonstrate an intersection or an alignment of values. The government is committed to being transparent and accountable in its operations.”
“Madam Speaker, this is why I love Private Members' Business in the House: We see hon. members making good-faith attempts to contribute to our country in meaningful ways. This is a great legislative initiative that has been brought forward by the member for Simcoe North . I very much appreciate him and his work at the finance committee in the past. I know he mentioned in his remarks that there may be some issues with partnerships related to the Privacy Act. I know it was not his intention in this particular private member's bill to breach any of the Privacy Act protections for tax purposes or for individuals, but perhaps the member could suggest whether he is open to amendments in that area.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am happy to report that I just recently met with those at Unifor Local 222, the local chapter at the GM Oshawa plant, and they are happy with what our government is doing to support them. They have said that no deal is better than a bad deal. They have acknowledged our remissions framework and how we have adjusted it, and they are looking to us for leadership and more support. That is exactly what the Prime Minister is announcing later today for tariff-impacted industries. Our government stands steadfast and strong in support of our workers all across Canada. We will not stand down and we will not take any lessons from the—”
“Mr. Speaker, here is a news flash: We are in a trade war. We are in a trade war, and we do not get to choose the attitude and the response of other countries. We get to choose what we do in response to protect our industries here in Canada. Tariff-impacted industries across Canada know that this government is standing up to protect their interests at every step along the way. Whether the Prime Minister is overseas securing new investments to open up other markets or whether he is offering new liquidity support and a package to help their businesses get through challenging times, we are steadfast in supporting Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, “Conservatives care” is like an oxymoron or some pathetic joke, because we know those two terms are like oil and water; they just do not mix. Who cares? Our government cares. We are the ones standing up for our industry. We are making more announcements today. The Prime Minister is stepping up with increased protections for our domestic market, with new support for our industries and workers in steel and softwood lumber and additional commitments to buy Canadian, so we ensure that our workers and industries will thrive for generations to come.”
“This is consistent with what was reflected in the draft legislative proposals for this measure, which were publicly released by the Department of Finance in August 2025. To provide clarity to impacted taxpayers, the government intends to propose an amendment to Bill C-15 to rectify this technical issue at the first opportunity.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order regarding Bill C-15 , the budget 2025 implementation act, no. 1. I would like to notify the House of a technical issue in clause 71. That clause of Bill C-15 proposes amendments to the trust reporting rules in the Income Tax Act. Some of these amendments were intended to first apply to the 2024 taxation year. Due to a technical issue in subclause 71(14) of Bill C-15, these amendments are inadvertently limited so that they apply only to the 2024 taxation year and not later years. It is the government's intention that the proposed amendments referenced in that subclause apply to the 2024 taxation year as well as to subsequent taxation years.”
“I ran a business for 13 years, and when someone runs a business, they put money aside to pay their taxes at the end of the year. Having these 100% writeoffs for new machinery, equipment and technology would allow businesses to make those investments immediately because they would know that they would have those tax writeoffs at the end of the year.”