Melissa Lantsman
Thornhill, Ontario · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the secretary of state confirmed what many Canadians already feared. A foreign government is funding and directing attacks on synagogues, businesses and the U.S. Consulate, and now the murder of a Toronto police officer. This government has known for years; they did nothing.”
“Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear, which is that the families of those police officers deserve better answers than that. The Liberals are in government. They have been there for 11 years. They are not bystanders in any of this. They let terrorists flood our country. They built a catch-and-release bail system.”
“I think this bill deserves to be debated and the House should give it that. Instead, the Liberals have rammed it through with what is called the programming motion to sweep this away right before they take their summer break. Let us go back to the member for Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong .”
“That has never been done in this place except with Bill C-9 , the last bill the government passed through the House. My colleague mentioned that she had never seen that happen in her 15 years in this place, which is longer than I have been here.”
“In a previous life, she sat on this side of the House as the Conservative shadow minister for civil liberties. She participated in nearly every civil liberties debate in this chamber. Every single time, she told Canadians the truth, which was that the government could not be trusted with privacy.”
“Let me say this to anybody watching at home at this late hour: The Liberals' argument in this debate is completely disingenuous, and they know it. I appreciate the police chief of York Regional Police. We have an enormously good relationship, a great one. I have also met with the commissioner of the OPP and with the Toronto police chief.”
The complete record
Every one of 465 lines we hold for Melissa Lantsman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 10.
“Motion Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House, at the conclusion of the time provided for Government Orders later this day, Bill C-19, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act, be deemed read a second time on division and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance, the committee shall meet to consider Bill C-19 on Tuesday, February 3, 2026, and shall hear from the Minister of Finance for at least one hour and any other witnesses the committee sees fit, at no later than 2:00 p.m.”
“Madam Speaker, I will extend wishes to my friend across the aisle for a happy new year and wish a happy new year to her constituents. When it comes to Canada's voice on the world stage, there is no question that over the last decade, we have lost the moral authority. We have let terror cells create a home, laundering money in our own country and intimidating our own citizens. We have lost our principles. Foreign policy comes with moral clarity, and we have lost all of it under successive Liberal prime ministers. I would love to have the days of Stephen Harper back when it comes to foreign policy. They were when this country was respected.”
“Madam Speaker, I want to remind the member that this country has what everybody wants. Beneath the ground, we have critical minerals and oil and gas. We also have the smartest people in the world to get that out, but we have a government standing in the way of all of that. Yes, I would like Canada to be more resilient and sovereign. The best way to do that is to give the world what God gave us.”
“Madam Speaker, I would like to remind all those watching at home that it is this member who sat in that seat for 10 years and completely reversed himself after the election, instilling the policies that, yes, we ran on in the last campaign. We are asking him to go a little further and, instead of talking about them at a podium, to actually get them done for Canadians. Canadians are waiting, and they do not have much longer.”
“We can do all of this right now and support sovereignty. Everything in the bill would translate to more jobs, more prosperity and, by virtue of this, a better economy and more money in the pocket of every single Canadian. What is more is that these are things that the Prime Minister , in the past, said he wanted to do. It is our job to help him do exactly that. If he would adopt this plan, I think we would get to moving a lot quicker. We would have shovels in the ground. We would have more money in the pockets of Canadians. It is not that complicated. When someone says they are going to do something, from a podium or in a speech, they should work to act on that.”
“The Canadian sovereignty act would do exactly that by introducing a reinvestment tax credit, which would eliminate the capital gains on profits invested in the Canadian economy. This would encourage domestic investment, strengthen productivity and keep capital working here at home. Third, the act would finally remove long-standing internal trade barriers, which he stood at a microphone and said were gone. The barriers cost our country $200 million a year, and they are still very much there. Just because someone says at a microphone that they are not there does not mean they are not there. Finally, the act would safeguard Canadian innovation and intellectual property from being appropriated by foreign competitors, particularly those with economic and security interests that do not align with ours. We saw plenty of that in the last week.”
“He knows that. He is slowing projects without delivering a public benefit. That is exactly what that bill does. Repealing the industrial carbon tax, the emissions cap, the EV mandate and the plastics ban would remove the unnecessary burdens that our industry has to compete with on the global market but cannot. The Prime Minister knows that as well. That is why he gave himself excessive powers to clear the path for resource projects. I invite him to give himself excessive powers so that we could repeal all of this. We would help him do it today. Second, a truly competitive economy has to reward those who commit their labour and their capital in this country, in Canada's success.”
“We want him to make this country better. Let us stop talking about it and start doing it. There is a piece of legislation, a plan, right here in front of us in the House of Commons to consider. It is the Conservatives' Canadian sovereignty act. It is a blueprint for an action plan that the Prime Minister seems to be missing. There are three main points in it. First, it would restore Canada's standing as a competitive resource-producing nation by dismantling the laws that actively impede development, the same laws that we helped him give himself the power to override when we helped him pass Bill C-5 . He has extraordinary powers now, and there are still things in the way. We are offering him that same goodwill in the House to speed this up. Measures like Bill C-69 have layered excessive paperwork and duplication onto the approvals process.”
“They remain carefully crafted slogans designed for a speech rather than a plan. There is no clear path forward. There is no timetable. There are no meaningful details outlining what the Prime Minister intends to do or when he intends to do it. I know that I will hear more as I split my time with the member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith . What is worse is that our deficit has gone up, not down. We have not built a single mile of new pipeline or even cleared the path for it. The biggest achievement right now is an office that has added more bureaucrats. In fact, 96% of what that office has spent has been $1 million on hiring bureaucrats. Not a single new project is even close to an approvals process. Here is what we are challenging the Prime Minister to do. We want him to put his money where his mouth is. We said we would help him do that.”
“Saying the right words means nothing when the right things are not done to match them. At least, that was the talk then. I agree with the Prime Minister when he says that Canada should rely more on itself, reduce its vulnerabilities and work with its partners who share our interests. These are things I think everybody in this House agrees on, and they are things that Conservatives have been saying for over a decade. In fact, they are the things we have been talking about doing for nearly a year now since he became Prime Minister. He wants to “build, baby, build”; to “invest more” and “spend less"; to make our country an “energy superpower”, or whatever the latest tag line is. (1550) We agree with those things in theory. Since those words were first spoken, nothing of substance has followed.”
“As somebody who has written many speeches, I give credit where credit is due, but here is where we diverge on opinion. This was before the public and private climb-downs that we are now hearing about. They view the speech as an announcement or a proclamation, and they view that as the solution. These things are not actually solutions; they are stepping stones. They are meant to communicate an idea, but they are not the actual actions. One grand speech from the Prime Minister cannot erase a 10-year legacy that has left our country's voice diminished and nearly meaningless in the face of the global threats we are facing today. The platitudes from the pundits and the chattering classes will not put food on people's tables, build pipelines or create jobs. They will not leave us an ounce more independent than we were previously.”
“They live with those consequences every single day, and they are seeing them right now more than ever. It is the same Liberal members who created these things, the very people who insisted they were good for Canada, who have doubled down time and again, calling others names for merely raising concerns over the last decade of what Canada did not do. The Liberals are now insisting that they are the ones to fix it. Here is their big idea on an action plan to fix these problems: another speech, another press conference, another committee study, a report back, long after it got more out of control, another band-aid or perhaps another project office. Whatever it is, it tends to be just words. Today I see members patting themselves on the back about a speech the Prime Minister gave in Davos last week.”
“Ten years of choices have steadily eroded Canada's strength and independence, leaving our country less self-reliant and more exposed over a full spectrum of national capacities: military, political, economic and diplomatic. In moments of global uncertainty, leadership is not measured by the words spoken abroad. It is about the resilience we build here at home. I can stand here and exhaust my time, and far more than that, cataloguing the Liberal government's failures, from allowing foreign interference to take root in Canada to leaving our citizens exposed to intimidation by terrorist-led organizations or keeping critical minerals in the ground beneath our feet, minerals the world urgently needs to get to other markets. However, Canadians do not need another inventory of failure. We have been there.”
“We come here to the House to hold the government accountable, to advocate for better policies and to serve Canadians in a fight for a country that we all love. It comes as no news flash to anybody that this country is under threat. Our sovereignty is being menaced, not just by somebody south of the border but also by a range of hostile actions and nations from all across the world. We would like to think that our government would stand up to these threats and make our nation safe and secure. In fact, that is the first job of any government. However, what if the record of the Liberals over the last decade stands in direct contradiction to doing just that?”
“Madam Speaker, it is good to be back in this place after some time away, at home in the community, time made longer by the government that took an extended break from doing what Canadians expected, which is what we are here to talk about. I do wish you a happy new year, Madam Speaker, but I cannot say the same for all Canadians, who over the past number of weeks have watched what is becoming known as a reckless world tour unfold, one without a clear world view, at a moment when our relationship with the U.S. is uncertain and fragile, if I am being polite. At a time when Canadians are looking for reassurance about their jobs, their future and the country's resilience, they are instead given confusion, mixed signals, growing insecurity and, most of all, a growing distance between words and outcomes.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member is right; we do see the announcements. We just do not see the action. The minister is very good at running up the word count but terrible at filling in the details. The Prime Minister says he wants to build, and that is good. We agree, so we have done the heavy lifting for him. We put a plan right here in the House of Commons: Repeal the laws that block development, reward businesses and workers that invest in Canada, and protect Canadian innovation. The choice is simple: The Liberals can actually vote to build today, or yet again they can vote for all talk and no action, just like he did.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister now has sweeping powers to approve major projects, powers made possible with the help of Conservatives on this side of the House, and yet with all that authority and all those promises, there is nothing done. There is no progress on resources, no pipelines and no action on internal trade barriers. The formula is not complicated; when Canada builds more and exports more, Canadians earn more and life gets more affordable. When does the action start? When do the shovels hit the ground? When do paycheques start growing for Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of petitioners who want this place to know that Hindus in Bangladesh have faced escalating violence, including arson, mob attacks, sexual assault, temple demolitions and forced displacement. There have been over 2,000 incidents in 2024 alone. I want the petitioners to know their voices have certainly been heard here, that the voices of the oppressed are amplified, and that we are going to intervene before it is too late.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will tell the member that the agreement was signed despite the Prime Minister , not because of him. I would also like to remind the Prime Minister that Toronto food banks got over four million visits last year. They are going to get even more when the price of groceries rises $1,000 per family next year. Will the government kill the industrial carbon tax, the packaging tax and the new fuel tax so that Canadians can afford food, or will he hop on another plane and avoid answering questions in this place altogether?”
“Mr. Speaker, yesterday we found out the Prime Minister spent almost $800,000 on a one-day taxpayer escape to Egypt to take a photo and not sign an agreement. Struggling Canadians are lining up at food banks and skipping meals, while the Prime Minister takes their money and skips town. We know it is second nature for the Prime Minister to live large on other people's dime, but can he at least stand up today and explain to hungry Canadians why he treats their tax dollars like his personal travel fund?”
“Mr. Speaker, after a decade in power, by saying “let Ottawa feed people's kids”, the Liberals have already admitted their failure. Let me put it in context for the minister. The number of people using a food bank in Toronto alone could fill the Rogers Centre eight times every single month. With the average grocery bill set to rise by $1,000 next year, the government's $11-a-year tax cut to those who need it most is not going to cut it. Therefore, no, we will not vote for it. Instead of giving crumbs back to Canadians, why do the Liberals not cut the taxes off of food and let Canadians have a meal at home?”
“Mr. Speaker, I think it is safe to say, after all of that, that the Prime Minister regrets telling Canadians that he is going to be judged by the prices at the grocery store because these prices are skyrocketing, and it is only getting worse. Now one in 10 people in Toronto are using a food bank and even full-time job holders have to use one. Instead of getting full carts at the grocery store, Canadians get to watch trending TikTok videos about making what they are calling “poverty meals” out of ramen and hot dogs. Can the Prime Minister seriously say with a straight face that this is the standard that he wants Canadians to live with?”
“We can restore safety, make homes attainable, reward work and fix what families depend on, instead of creating dependence on Ottawa. What Canadians are living through should not be and is not normal.”
“Mr. Speaker, today young people realize they cannot afford rent, let alone a home of their own. This is not normal. Across our cities and towns, tent encampments replace parks, as needles and crack pipes fill our streets and streetcars. Canadians are told to accept chaos as compassion. Small businesses board up. Even full-time workers are using food banks. This is not normal. Violent crime climbs, repeat offenders walk the streets and communities live in fear. Churches are burned, synagogues are vandalized and people of faith wonder when it became too dangerous to open their doors or speak their minds. None of this is normal. Canadians are being told to lower their expectations and accept this decay as the new normal. A country this rich and this capable should not feel this hopeless.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians are standing in food banks and food bank lines in record numbers while the Liberals pat themselves on the back. Feeding kids starts with making food more affordable. This is the same government that forced millions of Canadians to food banks and is now saying that people should be thankful for the programs that it cannot quantify and cannot deliver. Just 10 years ago, we used to be able to go grocery shopping for a week and spend $160. It has now more than doubled, to $340. When will the Liberals admit that their policies have failed and Canadians are struggling?”
“Mr. Speaker, with every trip to the grocery store, it seems like the prices we pay are getting higher and higher, because they are. If groceries feel expensive right now, then it is only going to get worse, because a new report this week shows that the price of groceries is going to go up $1,000 per family next year. It is no coincidence that the Liberals are also raising taxes on the people who grow and ship and sell the food. Does the government not realize that higher taxes on farmers and truckers mean more expensive groceries for struggling families?”
“Mr. Speaker, for the better part of two years, in that member's riding, there has been a lawless mob that has functioned with complete impunity through the streets calling for the genocide of its own citizens. There have been gunshots into a school and firebombings into businesses. We do not have a law problem in this country. We have an enforcement problem and a government that stands at its pedestal to pour fuel on the fire of that enforcement problem. Rather than it focusing on enforcement, why does the member think the government is bringing in a bill that is going to be weaponized against the very community it purports to protect?”
“Mr. Speaker, the minister needs to get her stories straight. There was $400 million given to executives at Algoma Steel, but there was zero for the people who actually make the steel. That means that a thousand people are out in the cold at Christmas. Nobody over there has a reasonable explanation for this deal, and this is not the first time that this megadollar mess has been caused. The Liberal minister already admitted that she does not read contracts. I want to know, did Algoma Steel catch the minister not reading, or is it just that the minister does not care?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government handed Algoma Steel $400 million and got zero Canadian jobs in return. Now 1,000 workers in Sault Ste. Marie are getting pink slips just weeks before Christmas. Worst, the Liberals knew about these layoffs, and they wrote them the cheque anyway. They looked steelworkers in the eye and promised to fight for them. The promise turned out to be a $400-million lie, and the Liberals knew it from day one. Can anyone over there explain why corporate welfare matters more than Canadian jobs?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is clear that we would never support any of the policies that doubled home prices over the last decade. However, families are not just leaving Toronto because it is expensive. They are leaving because it is dangerous. We have needles in parks and crack pipes on the subway, and everybody is just supposed to pretend that all of this is normal. Does the government understand that public safety failures, the cost of housing, the cost of food and the cost of everything else are pushing Canadians out of their own communities after 10 years of Liberal failures?”
“Mr. Speaker, once upon a time in Canada, one could work hard, earn a decent living and build a better life. In the decade of Liberal policy, that bargain has been blown to pieces. A CTV report this weekend showed that even families earning $200,000 are being driven out of Toronto because they cannot afford a basement rental, a home or anything else. Last year, 35,000 households fled the GTA, not because they wanted to, but because they had to. Is “move somewhere cheaper” the new official government slogan of the Liberals for Canadians who cannot afford to stay in their homes?”
“Mr. Speaker, that was not the Liberals' answer yesterday. In fact, that is not what the government said at all when it gave B.C. the veto in this House. Maybe the Liberals need to brush up on the Constitution, because section 92 explicitly gives them the power to build pipelines, whether David Eby likes it or not. He also got the legal authority from this House when the Liberals asked us to pass Bill C-5 to circumvent their own regulations, and the only thing holding them back now is the same gutless paralysis that has kept our oil buried and Canadians with less money over the last 10 years. Instead of hiding behind the premiers, will the Prime Minister get up and announce that he is going to build a pipeline?”
“Mr. Speaker, once again, Canadians are finding out that the Prime Minister is all sizzle and no steak. It turns out that his big pipeline announcement will not actually build a pipeline. He is going to have a meeting to set up a plan and then sign a piece of paper that talks about maybe one day putting shovels in the ground. Now he is handing veto power to the NDP in British Columbia, allowing it to block the whole thing. The Prime Minister is in Ottawa. We know he is having trouble with his own caucus on this issue, and now he is ducking the only question that Canadians have: Was yesterday the start of a real pipeline or just the latest episode of “announce now and deliver never”?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Premier of Alberta is expecting an east-west pipeline. The media is also reporting on the announcement of an east-west pipeline. The only ones who have not said it are the ones who are directly responsible for it. The Liberals cannot even utter the word “pipeline”. I have a simple question. Is the government in favour of an east-west pipeline, yes or no?”
“Mr. Speaker, after Justin Trudeau killed a pipeline in 2016 and backed the west coast shipping ban, the Liberals want credit for reversing their own damage. Reality has finally caught up and Canadians do not know which Prime Minister they might get. One day he is a climate crusader who wrote himself into green stardom, and now he is scrambling to review the very projects he spent a decade sabotaging. Will the government admit that its “keep it in the ground” crusade strangled our economy, weakened our sovereignty and left workers with the bill, or will it keep pretending that this was not all self-inflicted as it dances around a pipeline announcement?”
“Madam Speaker, for all those who are watching, the Prime Minister ran an election predicated on the biggest impediment to Canada's growing economy: U.S. trade tariffs. We heard him say that he does not care. I want those who are watching at home to know that Conservatives care. The Conservatives care about the job losses in the auto sector from Windsor to Oshawa and everywhere in between. They care about the tariffs that have now tripled on steel and aluminum. They care about the jobs in the forestry sector. There is one party in the House that cares, and that is the Conservative Party. I want Canadians to know we are never going to write off the relationship with the U.S. in an “I don't care”, nonchalant moment. That is not what a leader does. It is not what a leader should do.”
“Madam Speaker, we would not have to do that if the government just got out of its own way and reduced impediments to resource development in this country, approved projects in such a way that private sector proponents would want to invest here, lifted the oil and gas cap, stopped the shipping ban and lowered the industrial carbon tax so that it makes sense or, since it is going to do so on this project, stopped it from even being charged on the project when it is announced. We are going to applaud the government on announcing a pipeline, but we are not sure if everybody on that side agrees.”
“Madam Speaker, it seems as if there is always a comment from that member. I said in the House that Canada has the utmost potential. We have the smartest people in the world, the resources everybody wants and enough food to feed the world, but we are squandering that every single day through higher deficits, higher inflation and higher taxes. We have red tape in the way of building homes, mines, factories and pipelines. We simply want to see an end to the inflationary deficit. We want to see the cutting of taxes for everyone, and a government that rewards hard work and that will restore affordability for every single Canadian. I know that is not too much to ask, and I know the member opposite understands the value of an opposition regarding an unchecked prime minister.”
“That is why the Conservatives cannot and will not support $78 billion of new inflationary spending that will raise taxes and inflation on every single Canadian in every single part of their life.”
“Canadians who work every single day for wages are wondering what the heck is in this budget for them and when they are going to see some reprieve. We have a lessening standard of living in this country. The fear we have is that young people will just get used to this idea. They will get used to the idea that they cannot afford a good meal, that they cannot afford to purchase a home and that they cannot afford a good-quality life in what should be the richest country in the world. It was not like this 10 years ago. This budget does nothing to alleviate the pain of those who go to work every single day and who are looking to the government for answers. It has provided none for those people.”
“It is always about centralization. It is always about making sure we thank the government for bringing in another program to get rid of the problems the government itself has caused over the last 10 years. That is the tale of the two Canadas. Those who work for a living are constantly trying to get further with less. An inflationary budget that spends $78 billion is going to ensure that it gets worse, not better. Today, we have nine out of 10 young Canadians not believing they will ever buy a home. The government's answer to that was to create yet another housing bureaucracy, the fourth, to try to get houses built when the first three did not work. The government dumped $13 billion into yet another government project.”
“Four million people are going to use a food bank in Canada, and the government wants to be thanked for introducing a food program. That is always the government's answer: Create more bureaucracy. When it cannot get a project built, it announces a project management office that will shuffle papers and eventually give an approval for something that has already been approved, as in the case of one pipeline. If it causes food inflation to soar with its hidden taxes, like an industrial carbon tax that raises the tax on producers, a packaging tax that raises the tax on the purchasers of food or any of the other hidden food taxes, it comes in with a big government program to ensure Canadians will thank them, while two million people are still in the food bank line and while food costs 40% more here than it does in the U.S.”
“All these things probably will eventually happen while members of the party opposite drag their feet, kicking and screaming. However, it is the Prime Minister who sabotaged all that during his tenure as an adviser to the Liberal government. When the former prime minister cancelled the 2016 pipeline, or when he got in the way of it being built, frankly, and put in that shipping ban, it was the current Prime Minister who cheered him on from the sidelines. People can read about it in his very own book. When I talk about the budget and squandering its potential, these are the things I mean. This country has the smartest people in the world. We have enough food to feed ourselves and the rest of the world. Instead, there are two million people lined up at food banks.”
“In case it does come, because the Premier of Alberta and the news media are talking about it like it is a done deal, this is a government that has invested in more bureaucracy rather than just going ahead and getting out of its own way. In order to build a pipeline in this country, we have to get rid of things like a shipping ban off the west coast. We would applaud the government if it came out and said what it was going to do. We would have to get rid of an oil and gas cap in order for anything to be filled in that pipeline and to take it somewhere, such as tidewater, eventually, where there is still a shipping ban. We would have to reduce the industrial carbon tax, or at least make sure that this particular project does not have that in the way, just like LNG Canada. All these things need to happen in order for a pipeline to get built.”
“It takes longer to reach anybody on the phone, yet the public service has grown and the services have gotten worse. That is what we would end up paying for in this budget. Let us talk more about the tale of two Canadas. If a person draws their income from a portfolio, this budget might have a few things for them. It has some of the good ideas that we brought forward in the last election campaign, although it does not go far enough. (1215) We talk about resource development. The government has been beating its chest about a pipeline announcement that will come to the table at some point, whether in six days, six weeks or maybe not at all.”
“This country has an overwhelming amount of potential, but it seems that at every turn over the last 10 years, that potential has been squandered. We have everything the world wants, and we should be the richest country in the world, but we have a government that is spending away our future on a credit card with very little to show for it. We have a federal bureaucracy that has grown by 99,000 workers over the last 10 years, and now we have a government that cannot say where workforce reductions will come from. By the way, none of our services have ever gotten better. In fact, people wait longer for services. People wait on the phone with the CRA only to maybe get somebody, and if they get somebody, 80% of answers have been found to be incorrect. It takes longer to get a passport.”
“The weak economic performance in this budget should alarm Canadians more than just the sticker shock. It has real GDP growth in 2025 at 1.1%, which is the second-lowest in the G7, and unemployment averages at 6.4% over the coming years. The industrial carbon tax would remain in place and will get higher. This should all be concerning, but what is most concerning about this budget is that it tells a story of two different Canadas that would be created. There would be those who work for wages and see nothing at all in relief in this budget, and those who invest for income. Those two groups have been targeted very differently. The problem is that the first group, those who go to work every single day and collect a paycheque, would not see anything in this budget, and it is concerning.”
“What I mean by generational debt is the Liberal government would add more than $320 billion of federal debt over the next five years and the cycle of the budget. Again, that is more than what Justin Trudeau was going to add, because he was at about $154 billion. The budget would add $10 million of debt every hour. That matters, because like any other debt Canadians incur, they pay interest on that debt. We would pay $55 billion just to service that debt every single year. That is not money that would be going to doctors, hospitals or nurses. In fact, it is more than the government transfers to the provinces for health care. It is also the amount the government collects in the GST. This means that every dollar collected in sales tax by the federal government would not go to doctors, hospitals or nurses, but to bankers to service that debt.”
“Madam Speaker, when Canadians saw the budget that was presented to Canada, I think they could have used two words to describe it: sticker shock. It is sticker shock because of the $78 billion presented as the deficit. This is, of course, $16 billion more than the Prime Minister promised during the campaign. It is double what the last prime minister, Justin Trudeau, spent, and he spent more than all prime ministers combined. It is also the most this country has ever spent outside of the pandemic years. Let us go through some more numbers. There is over $90 billion of new spending. The Liberals have called these generational investments, but they are in fact generational debt. I will talk a bit about what this budget means for those who will have to pay for it later.”
“Mr. Speaker, I wanted to test this out. I was at home in my riding, and like a lot of my other colleagues, I hear the same questions about affordability and the fact that Canadians are just getting sacked with higher grocery prices and higher prices on homes and gas, so I tried an experiment. I went to a grocery store in a riding right next door to mine that is represented by a Liberal, and lo and behold, I heard the exact same conversations. People in that grocery store came up to me and they also told me about the taxes on food, the unaffordable housing, gas, groceries and home heating. It turns out that the Liberals are hearing that from their constituents. It is just that they are not doing anything about it.”