Carol Anstey
Long Range Mountains, Newfoundland and Labrador · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Prime Minister has said affordability is the best that it has been in decades, even though some Canadians are crowdfunding their way through this cost of living crisis. He is so out of touch. The costly Liberal Prime Minister is the only G20 leader to drag his nation into a recession.”
“Mr. Speaker, targets may not matter to that Liberal minister, but disabled Canadians rely on those supports and they certainly deserve better. Large areas of Gros Morne National Park are covered in dry timber and at risk of wildfire because of the spruce budworm outbreak.”
“They have exhausted their savings, maxed out their credit cards and refinanced their homes just to keep up with food inflation, rising rents and soaring mortgage payments. Clearly, the plan is not working.”
“At a critical time when we need more supply and builders are asking for less government, the Liberals are focusing on building a new bureaucracy that is simply an expensive exercise in rebranding.”
“Do not take it from me. A witness from the Ontario Home Builders' Association testified, “As the industry association representing home builders...we know that builders are the experts and the ones who are best suited to construct the homes we need, not the government” and “the path forward is not for government to step into the role of t…”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend, who has strong ties to Newfoundland and Labrador, for that question. When we build out government bureaucracy, we build out the size of government and we increase government spending, which drives up inflation, which drives up the cost of everything, including the cost of homebuilding.”
The complete record
Every one of 352 lines we hold for Carol Anstey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 8.
“They are built into the prices at every stage of the supply chain. Conservatives support helping Canadians through a difficult period. That is why we will allow this measure to move forward so that any relief is not delayed. However, we also believe Canadians should not be left with the impression that the legislation represents a permanent or comprehensive solution, because real affordability comes from lowering the costs built into prices in the first place. For those reasons, we will support Bill C-19 , but we will continue to press for lasting affordability for Canadians in Newfoundland and Labrador and across the country.”
“To understand why grocery prices continue to rise, we need to be honest about the role of government policy. Governments cannot control global weather patterns or international markets, but they do control taxes, regulations and spending decisions. When fuel costs rise, food becomes more expensive to grow, process and transport. When the government taxes industry, those costs are passed on to consumers. When deficits grow unchecked, inflation erodes purchasing power for everyone. The government insists there is no tax on food. Canadians know that is not true in practice. Clean fuel regulations increase the cost of gasoline and diesel. The industrial carbon tax increases the cost of operating farms, processing facilities and transportation networks. These costs do not disappear.”
“A payment that arrives once is quickly swallowed by rising costs, and families are left facing the same grocery bill the very next week. Without addressing inflation and the policies driving it, the benefit disappears while the problem remains. That observation captures the core weakness of Bill C-19 . In addition, this measure is not new. In 2022, the Liberal government doubled the same GST credit. Canadians were promised relief. Food prices continued to rise. Food bank use increased. Affordability worsened. When governments choose income supports instead of tackling cost drivers, inflation continues to go unchecked. Prices rise. Benefits follow. Families are left chasing higher costs with temporary relief. The cycle is not sustainable for households or for public finances.”
“They are struggling daily to afford good, healthy food. They are asking a fair and reasonable question: Why is help with food insecurity limited to some Canadians, while others facing the same costs are excluded entirely? I have also heard from people who returned to work temporarily to fill gaps or support essential services. Because of that short-term income, they have been pushed out of eligibility altogether. Their long-term financial situation did not improve, and their grocery bills certainly did not go down. They are now left uncertain about whether they will receive this benefit at all, despite facing the same rising prices as everyone else. One message to my office summed it up clearly: If a policy does nothing to change prices, it does nothing to fix affordability.”
“Young Canadians are telling me they cannot save for a home or pay off student loans to truly start their lives because their budgets are stretched so thin with the grocery prices. This is what persistent inflation looks like in real life. It is not one bad week or one unexpected bill. It is the stress of watching prices rise while income stays the same. It is the exhaustion that comes from constantly adjusting, cutting back and falling further behind despite doing everything right. Canadians are asking for seriousness, and they are asking for policies that recognize how hard life has become and that respond with some more permanent solutions. I have heard from retirees whose incomes sit just above the GST credit eligibility threshold. They receive no benefit under this bill, yet they face the same grocery prices as everyone else.”
“(1745) That means when fuel costs rise, when regulations increase transportation expenses, or when supply chains are disrupted and produce sits on a transport truck in the ferry lineup for multiple days and is spoiled, those increases show up faster and more sharply in Newfoundland and Labrador. Policies that add costs anywhere along that chain have an outsized impact on families in our province. Canadians are making decisions today that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. They are buying cheaper food, not because they want to, but because it is all that they can afford. They are skipping fresh produce, stretching meals and cutting portion sizes so groceries last a little longer. Seniors are choosing between filling prescriptions and buying enough food for the week.”
“This measure may help briefly, but it does not keep up with grocery prices that continue to rise month after month. To them, real affordability means prices coming down and staying down. Canada now has the highest food inflation in the G7. Food inflation is double what it is in the United States. This tells us that it is a made-in-Canada problem. Statistics Canada shows that an average family of four is expected to spend approximately $17,500 on food in 2026, which is an increase of almost $1,000 from 2025. In Newfoundland and Labrador, these pressures are felt even more acutely. Our province relies far more heavily on imported food than many other parts of the country do. A significantly higher share of what ends up on grocery store shelves must be shipped in, often over long distances and through multiple transportation points.”
“Nearly one in four residents in Newfoundland and Labrador is now 65 years or older, which is the highest share of seniors in any province in Canada. This demographic reality means a larger portion of low-income, fixed-income households, who are particularly vulnerable to rising food prices and who spend a bigger share of their limited income on essentials. This combination of high food inflation, rural cost pressures, and an older, lower-income population shows why measures like Bill C-19 , while they may be well intentioned, do not go far enough to address the depth of the crisis people are facing in Newfoundland and Labrador. As a result, people are certainly anxious, paying attention and immediately responding to my office. What I am hearing from constituents is consistent and clear.”
“In 2024, 30.1% of people in our province lived in a food insecure household, well above the national average, placing us among the highest rates in Canada. That is roughly 158,000 of our neighbours struggling to afford the food they need and want, and things have only gotten worse. Food costs have continued to rise faster than incomes, and while families everywhere feel the pinch, the crisis is even more acute outside of our urban centres. Rural and smaller communities face higher food costs and greater barriers to accessing affordable, nutritious food than those in urban centres, underscoring that people in my riding are bearing a disproportionate share of the hardship. Compounding these pressures is our rapidly aging population.”
“In addition, this measure is a drop in the bucket compared to what Canadians are paying at the grocery store. For most households, it will be gone after only a few trips, while prices continue to rise week after week. It will offer short-term relief but do nothing to change the reality Canadians face every single time they buy food. Canadians understand that a temporary credit may help cover a bill but does not change the prices on the shelves. Our responsibility as parliamentarians is not only to pass measures that provide short-term help but to be honest with Canadians about whether these measures will actually improve their lives in a lasting way. This is an even more concerning issue where I come from. According to Food First NL, Newfoundland and Labrador is facing a profound food security crisis.”
“Canadians deserve honesty and transparency about what the bill does and, just as importantly, what it does not do. With respect to transparency, the Parliamentary Budget Officer confirmed this morning that the entire cost of this measure will be borrowed, adding approximately $1.397 billion in new interest charges over the next five years, which is money Canadians would pay just to service the debt. When affordability measures are funded through borrowing, Canadians pay higher inflation, higher interest rates and higher taxes. Conservatives believe that short-term relief should not come at the expense of long-term affordability. Accordingly, supporting the bill before us does not mean ignoring its shortcomings or pretending that this half measure is a response to a serious problem that is facing Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time today with the member for Calgary Centre . It is an honour to rise today to speak on behalf of the people of the Long Range Mountains on Bill C-19 , and to explain why Conservatives will support this legislation while also being honest and transparent with Canadians about the serious affordability challenges it does not solve. The government is saying that this measure is intended to help Canadians manage the rising cost of groceries and essential goods. We Conservatives will not obstruct or delay help reaching people, because any relief is better than none for Canadians who are struggling right now, but supporting the bill does not mean we are pretending that it solves the problem Canadians are facing.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' policies will never lower grocery prices with rebates or temporary fixes. As an example, we will not block Bill C-19 , but its small rebates would not make food cheaper at the checkout. I have heard from retirees in Newfoundland and Labrador who sit just above the GST credit threshold. They would get no benefit at all, yet they face the same high grocery prices as everyone else. This temporary measure would not reduce the price of a single item in a grocery store, but it is an admission that the Liberals' policies have driven up the cost of living. The are now sending out cheques instead of fixing the problem. Will the Liberals support our food affordability plan?”
“Mr. Speaker, Canada has some of the highest food inflation in the G7, and Canadians are paying for it at the grocery store. Food bank use has more than doubled, with over two million visits every month by people who simply cannot afford groceries. The industrial carbon tax raises the costs of farm equipment, fertilizer and food processors. The Liberals' fuel standard tax raises fuel prices for truckers, driving up the cost of getting food to store shelves. Even government reports admit these increases flow through the supply chain to grocery bills. Will the government support our motion to introduce a food affordability plan to eliminate the industrial carbon tax and the fuel standard tax?”
“Mr. Speaker, I wanted to respond to some comments made across the way with respect to the minority parliament and Newfoundland and Labrador, where gains were made for the Conservatives after decades of Liberal members. One of the things that resonated with people back home is how Conservatives were addressing the urban and rural divide we often see in this country. I am curious if the member would like to expand on how the opposition day motion speaks to that and could help bring development into rural Canada instead of hand-picking projects as the Liberals seem to want to do.”
“Madam Speaker, I could not agree more. What about the projects that are still caught up in regulatory paralysis, that do not qualify under nation-building projects? The government has given itself the ability to pick and choose what projects will go forward. We still have tons of smaller projects that want to advance. That is really punishing to rural parts of the country. My riding is mostly rural, so that is definitely a huge concern that I have and something that I hear about on a consistent basis.”
“Madam Speaker, we continue to hope that the government takes our advice and reintroduces policy. We have been saying this for 10 years because this is what we are hearing from Canadians. We welcome the fact that the Liberals are taking these policies and reintroducing them, but lots of times they are half-baked or are somewhere in the middle. The Liberals know what Canadians want, but they are not willing to go all the way. I agree with the member. If Canadians want Conservatives, the real deal, then they need to vote for Conservatives in the next election instead of voting for the half-baked measures of the Liberals.”
“Madam Speaker, that is certainly not what I see at this time. What I see is government overreach. The Liberals want their hand-picked projects. They want to make Canadians reliant on government programs. Consistently and constantly, I hear investors, business owners and people who want to grow saying that the government just needs to get out of the way. This is what a Canadian sovereignty act is meant to ensure. It is calling on the government to get out of the way so that we can grow as an economy right here in Canada.”
“Common sense tells us that this approach is not sustainable. Encouraging companies to reinvest here would strengthen our economy, reinforce our sovereignty and keep Canada competitive. Canadians are tired of promises, fancy speeches and announcements that do not translate into real improvements in their lives. They want common sense. This is what a Canadian sovereignty act is meant to restore.”
“Mandates force compliance before systems are ready and push costs on to families and small businesses. Even more concerning is that an analysis published in the Canadian Journal of Economics suggested that EV mandates could outpace cost parity and consumer demand, and that Canada could potentially face a collapse of its auto manufacturing sector and the loss of more than 100,000 jobs. In the face of this reality, the government's indefinite pause on electric vehicle mandates, with no clear timeline or answers, is simply unacceptable. People want openness and transparency, which is why Conservatives are clear and upfront about where we stand. All of these, the industrial carbon tax, the oil gas emissions cap and the vehicle mandates, collide and drive up costs at a time when Canadians are already stretched.”
“A reinvestment tax cut would help entrepreneurs in rural communities just as much as those in major cities, and it ensures capital stays local. This motion also speaks to the electrical vehicle mandate, because forcing a one-size-fits-all target on Canadians, especially in a country with such vast and diverse geography and demographics, adds costs instead of delivering practical, affordable solutions. I want to be clear that this is not an argument against electric vehicles; it is an argument against the mandates. Conservatives believe government should not be telling Canadians what type of vehicle they are allowed to buy or drive. Consumer choice drives markets. When Canadians choose a product because it works for them, demand grows, technology improves, prices come down and infrastructure follows.”
“This is about keeping capital here, putting it to work here and strengthening our economy from the ground up. When businesses reinvest in Canada, Canadian workers benefit, communities grow and government revenues increase without raising taxes on families, which makes life more affordable for Canadians. This matters deeply for Newfoundland and Labrador, where our economy is powered by small and medium-sized businesses. Family enterprises, fish harvesters, construction firms, tourism operators and energy-related service companies are the backbone of our community. These businesses are not asking for government handouts. They are asking for a fair chance to reinvest, expand and pass something on to the next generation.”
“When investment slows, the impact is felt far beyond the energy sector itself. Investment is so important to our economy and our country right now, which is why this motion also advances a Canada first reinvestment tax cut. This is a practical measure that would let Canadians reinvest capital back into Canadian businesses and projects, and keep investment, jobs and growth at home instead of driving them out of the country. If small businesses, housing providers, innovators and investors were to reinvest capital back into Canada, it would unlock domestic investment, boost productivity and keep capital from leaving the country. Even independent tax experts have described this idea as a potential game changer because it rewards reinvestment in Canadian companies rather than punishing success.”
“Canada produces energy with some of the highest environmental and labour standards in the world. When production is pushed out of Canada and into countries with weaker standards, global emissions increase. That does nothing to protect the environment; it simply costs Canadians jobs and investment. In Newfoundland and Labrador, offshore oil and gas is not just a policy discussion; it is how families make a living. It is how young people see a future at home. It is also how we fund health care, education and infrastructure. This is why Conservatives have been honest about what this policy does. It is a job-killing cap that hurts workers without helping the environment. The emissions cap also creates uncertainty across the broader economy. Energy projects support supply chains, service industries and local businesses.”
“Industry leaders have described this cap as not just a cap on production, but also a cap on investment. These leaders include Jim Keating, the chief executive officer of the Oil and Gas Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador, who was responsible for overseeing and promoting the development of our offshore oil and gas resources. He warned that this approach undermines Canada's ability to attract and retain long-term capital. Investment decisions are made years in advance. Companies need certainty, clarity and confidence that if they invest in Canada, the rules will not change halfway through the project. (1030) Global demand for oil and gas has not disappeared, and when Canada produces less, someone else produces more. Reducing Canadian production does not reduce global demand; it simply shifts production elsewhere.”
“This lack of certainty matters for investors and industry, because without a clear legislative commitment on whether or not the emissions cap will exist or be enforceable, businesses cannot confidently plan long-term development. Investors need predictable, stable policy, not vague conditions on future technologies. This is exactly why a Canadian sovereignty act matters. Its explicit removal of the emissions cap would deliver the clarity and certainty that foreign and domestic capital require to invest in Canada's resource sector and support jobs across the country. This is so important to Newfoundland and Labrador. Therefore, I want to re-emphasize that the government presents this policy as a cap on emissions. Conservatives have been clear that in practice, this is a cap on jobs, a cap on revenue and a cap on opportunity.”
“For Newfoundland and Labrador's offshore industry, which is one of the cleanest and most highly regulated in the world, federal uncertainty and caps drive away investment, delay projects and threaten good-paying jobs. I want to drill down into this a little further, because I know the government will hide behind the budget, which signalled a shift in how it approaches oil and gas emissions policy. However, the government did not definitively repeal or provide a clear direction on the cap. It talked about other measures and how, if those measures were met, the cap would no longer be required. This leaves uncertainty about whether and how a cap might be implemented in the future.”
“Canada is one of the richest nations in the world. It is rich in natural resources, rich in talent and rich in opportunity, yet Canadians are struggling. Families are making harder choices. Businesses are delaying decisions and investment. Communities are wondering what comes next. I hear it all the time from people in my riding in Newfoundland and Labrador. Canada is one of the richest places in the country when it comes to natural resources, yet we continue to experience some of the weakest economic outcomes. Canadians are rightly asking why a country so blessed keeps holding itself back. That concern is exactly why the oil and gas emissions cap matters so much.”
“We are proposing solutions that restore investment confidence and get this country building again, and it is in that spirit that this motion is also about affordability. Conservatives know that affordability starts with opportunity. When we build more at home, we create jobs, increase incomes and strengthen the economic foundation that makes life more affordable for Canadians. This motion is also about an invitation to work together to produce real results for the challenges Canadians are facing. Canadians are doing what they are supposed to do. They are working hard, they are running businesses, they are raising families and they are trying to plan for the future. What they are struggling with is a system that keeps adding cost, complexity and uncertainty instead of applying common sense.”
“This opposition day motion is about restoring Canadian economic sovereignty by making it easier to build, invest and innovate here at home, while recognizing the growing urban-rural divide in our country. It is about being straightforward with Canadians by calling on the government to remove the federal laws and taxes that block resource development and industrial growth, including policies like the electric vehicle mandate that disproportionately hurts rural Canadians; unlock our natural resources to rebuild the communities that depend on them; reward businesses that invest in Canada through a Canada-first reinvestment tax cut; and protect Canadian innovation so that Canadian jobs, resources and ideas stay in Canadians' hands.”
“Madam Speaker, I want to start by welcoming my colleague and friend, with a strong connection to Newfoundland and Labrador, back to this House. It is my honour today to get up and speak to this opposition day motion. Let me begin, first and foremost, by wishing my constituents in the Long Range Mountains, and all Canadians, a happy, healthy and prosperous new year. As we look ahead to the challenges before us, this debate on a Canadian sovereignty act is about a simple, but urgent question: Will Canada once again be a country that builds, produces and invests in itself, or will it continue down a path that leaves its resources undeveloped, its capital fleeing abroad and too many communities, especially rural ones, falling behind?”
“Mr. Speaker, we are ready to work with the government on real, long-term solutions instead of recycled, temporary, Trudeau-era rebates. Canada has been called the food inflation capital of the G7. That is real hardship. People back home ask me how far this has to go before it stops. The Prime Minister cannot blame global factors when all other countries have lower food price inflation than Canada. It is a homegrown problem of high Liberal taxes. Will the government focus on actually bringing down food prices, or will it defend policies that make food more expensive?”
“Mr. Speaker, Stats Canada confirms what Canadian families already know at the checkout. Food inflation has jumped by 6.2% in the last year. Grocery prices are up 5%, and Canada now has the highest food inflation in the G7. Newfoundland and Labrador has the second-highest food inflation rate in the entire country. Higher transportation costs mean that local families are hit even harder. Conservatives are ready to fast-track measures to bring food prices down. Will the government eliminate the industrial carbon tax and the 17¢-a-litre fuel standards tax so that Canadians can afford the basics?”
“Mr. Speaker, that answer is not acceptable, and I am going to tell you why. A woman in my riding shared a moment that she said she will never forget. She was in the grocery store and saw a senior couple standing at the meat counter. The elderly wife looked at her husband and quietly said, “I know I need to buy something, but I do not know what to buy because everything is so expensive.” The woman who witnessed this exchange told me she went to her car and cried. She never thought she would see seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador struggling like that. When will the Prime Minister finally take these struggles seriously and make life affordable for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?”
“Mr. Speaker, while Canadians cannot afford the basics, the Liberal Prime Minister spent nearly $800,000 on a private jet. In Newfoundland and Labrador we have the highest unemployment rate in the country, at more than 10%. Families are stretched thin. “Canada's Food Price Report” shows that the grocery bill has more than doubled since 2015, rising from $159 a week to $338. Next year families are expected to pay even more. When will the Liberals stop their inflationary spending and cut the industrial carbon tax and their new fuel tax so Canadians can afford to eat?”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of Canadians with respect to the Liberal-Bloc amendments to Bill C-9 . I was in my riding on the weekend and was absolutely overwhelmed with the number of constituents who brought this concern forward to me with hundreds of signatures. In a country that is hungry and hurting, the government has prioritized attacking freedom of religion and freedom of expression over dealing with the broken Liberal bail system at justice committee. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion are fundamental rights that must be preserved. The petitioners are calling on the government to protect religious freedom and stop the government overreach.”
“Madam Speaker, I also serve a riding in Atlantic Canada. One thing I commonly hear in my riding is that rural and remote communities have been left behind by the Liberal government and have also been punished by the high cost of everything and the policies the Liberals have implemented. I am just wondering if my colleague hears the same thing. Maybe he would like to speak to that.”
“Mr. Speaker, a local single mom of three reached out to me today in complete desperation. She is working hard, doing everything right, yet a series of setbacks has pushed her to the brink. She is falling behind on the basics. Now she is trying to figure out how to give her kids Christmas, while food inflation makes the essentials feel out of reach. Families should not have to choose between groceries and giving their children a holiday. When will the Prime Minister finally take this seriously and make life affordable for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister told Canadians that he should be judged by the prices at the grocery store. Canadians are now paying 112% more for food than when the Liberals took office and groceries are consuming a bigger share of every family's budget. Even basic centre-aisle staples, such as coffee and baby formula, are skyrocketing. Canada's food price report confirms that next year, Canadians will pay an extra $1,000 on groceries. When will these Liberals finally stop their inflationary spending, scrap the industrial carbon tax and let Canadians afford groceries again?”
“Mr. Speaker, I have a question around something that is really important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. There was some language in the budget around the oil and gas production cap: that maybe the government would get rid of it because it may no longer be necessary. I am wondering whether the member opposite supports getting rid of the oil and gas production cap completely and giving a strong commitment around that.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to give my colleague an opportunity to expand on the real-life consequences of this budget and the rising costs. I hear about them on a regular basis, and I am curious to know if he hears about them on a regular basis too. How are Canadians really impacted by the reckless spending of the Liberal government?”
“Mr. Speaker, the hollow letter of intent does not change the facts: The Prime Minister has flown to meet with the Brits in the U.K., a world tour of photo ops and selfies, and Canadians have absolutely nothing to show for it. There have been no wins on tariffs, just more tariffs every single time he travels. He promised his jet-setting diplomacy would help Canadians; all it has done is help his Instagram feed. Will the Prime Minister finally admit that his international photo op tours are not delivering results, because the only thing going up when he travels is the cost to Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, do members remember “elbows up”? Well, the only thing up right now is the Prime Minister 's air miles. He has flown enough kilometres to circle the earth four times, but after all that globetrotting, Canadians still get no deals, no relief, higher tariffs and higher bills. Every time the Prime Minister steps off a private jet, Canadians get hit with another tariff hike. After the U.S., there were higher tariffs. After China, there were new tariffs on seafood and grain. Why is it that every time the Prime Minister meets foreign leaders, Canadians get stuck paying for his failures through higher tariffs?”
“These volunteers play an important role in keeping francophone life strong and vibrant. I was inspired by their sense of culture, musical talent, pride and community spirit. I offer warm congratulations on these milestones and best wishes for the years ahead.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize important milestones for the francophone community in Newfoundland and Labrador. I was pleased to recently attend the celebration that marked the 52nd annual general meeting of the Fédération des francophones de Terre-Neuve et du Labrador and the 30th anniversary of ARCO, two organizations that continue to strengthen culture, language and community in our province. For many years, they have organized festivals, creating spaces where families, youth and newcomers can celebrate heritage, build connections and feel a true sense of belonging. I especially want to acknowledge the volunteers who support and drive these organizations. Like so many groups in our province, their programs and events rely on the people who give their time, energy and care.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have a question about the first-time homebuyer tax credit the Liberals are offering, which Conservatives loved because it was a part of our platform. I am in the housing market. That is my background. I am wondering if the Liberals have given any thought, considering the cost of housing, as to how many young people this is actually going to help with getting into the housing market given the high price of construction in the current market.”
“Mr. Speaker, I particularly listened when the member across the way talked about the carbon tax and all the conversation we heard about it prior to the election about how the carbon tax did not drive up the cost for Canadians and that, in fact, more money was going into their pockets. I am curious if now the member is talking about how removing the carbon tax is driving the cost down, which we know is not really the case. Does he not now believe in the previous argument, or does he now agree the carbon tax did indeed drive up the cost of everything?”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of Canadians who are concerned about access to disability supports for those living with severe mental illness. The petitioners note that Canadians diagnosed with conditions such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia continue to face greater barriers when trying to apply for federal disability programs. They believe current forms do not fully recognize the serious and life-altering impacts of psychological disabilities. The petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to improve how disability related to mental illness is assessed so vulnerable Canadians and their families can receive the support they need. I am honoured to table this petition on their behalf.”
“Mr. Speaker, the $742-million gun grab has been a complete disaster from day one. It is wrapped in controversy, with leaked audio revealing that the public safety minister himself admitted that it will not work. The Cape Breton pilot program reportedly only had 22 firearms turned in. Now, the police chief overseeing the program, who is the brother-in-law of the Liberal member, is suddenly retiring. Will the Liberals finally admit that the program is a waste of taxpayers' money, admit that it has failed, and scrap it?”
“Mr. Speaker, you are 100% right. I knocked on thousands of doors while campaigning, and I speak to constituents all the time. I speak about the issue all the time because it is so relevant and so true. When seniors reach out to me saying they are spending the day at Tim Hortons because they cannot afford to feed themselves at home, when they should be living the rest of their life in dignity, it hurts me and makes me passionate about this. There is a real-life consequence, and it needs to be changed. The cost of things in Newfoundland and Labrador needs to come down.”