Kathy Borrelli
Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, Ontario · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to table a dissenting report to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology's report on the impact of U.S. tariffs on Canada's metallurgical and advanced manufacturing sectors.”
“That is why our dissenting report calls for urgent negotiations to secure a trade agreement, stronger protections for our manufacturing base, support for domestic production and action to preserve the jobs and industrial capacity that are vital to Canada. The industry asked for a quick response to secure its future.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians strength and stability, but under his watch, Canada became the only G20 country in a recession. That is the result of Liberal inflationary spending, red tape and anti-development policies that have crushed workers, businesses and families.”
“Parliament has already taken steps in that direction through targeted right to repair legislation. In recent years, members from different parties have worked to address practical barriers that prevent Canadians from repairing the products they own.”
“Every single one of us gets frustrated when products break too soon, when repairs are difficult or when replacing an item seems easier than fixing it. Those concerns are real. Canadians should be able to repair the products they own, access reasonable repair options and receive clear information about the products they buy.”
“That framework would include measures related to minimum useful life, labelling, access to parts, tools and repair information, replacement parts, technical documentation, software support and the responsibilities of manufacturers, importers and distributors.”
The complete record
Every one of 84 lines we hold for Kathy Borrelli, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 2.
“That is why our dissenting report calls for urgent negotiations to secure a trade agreement, stronger protections for our manufacturing base, support for domestic production and action to preserve the jobs and industrial capacity that are vital to Canada. The industry asked for a quick response to secure its future. The Conservatives answered that call immediately, and we always will.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to table a dissenting report to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology's report on the impact of U.S. tariffs on Canada's metallurgical and advanced manufacturing sectors. I would like to recognize and thank my Conservative colleagues, our staff and, especially, the member for Essex , whose advocacy was important in bringing attention to this issue. When this crisis emerged, the Conservatives responded immediately because we understand that these industries are foundational to Canada. The Conservatives know the committee's report and recommendations do not reflect the urgency expressed by the witnesses.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians strength and stability, but under his watch, Canada became the only G20 country in a recession. That is the result of Liberal inflationary spending, red tape and anti-development policies that have crushed workers, businesses and families. Canadians deserve a Prime Minister who takes responsibility, not one who hides behind excuses. Will the Prime Minister admit that his policies caused the crisis, or will he keep pretending Canadians are not struggling under his watch?”
“(1820) At a time when businesses are already struggling with red tape, tariffs, supply chain pressures and weak productivity, we should not support legislation that could add new compliance costs and uncertainty. Canadians deserve products that are durable. They also deserve affordable products. They deserve repair options, but they also deserve marketplace choice. They deserve consumer protection, but—”
“They did not impose broad new federal product standards. They did not create a national framework for minimum product lifespans. They did not open the door to sweeping new rules on labelling, replacement parts, technical documentation and the like, and that distinction matters. Conservatives have supported practical right to repair reforms because they can empower consumers, support farmers, help small businesses and improve competition. As we consider the best policy response, we should focus on measures that remove unnecessary barriers to repair, support competition in repair markets and give consumers better information without imposing rigid top-down requirements that may not fit every product category, or even consumer need.”
“Parliament has already taken steps in that direction through targeted right to repair legislation. In recent years, members from different parties have worked to address practical barriers that prevent Canadians from repairing the products they own. For example, in the 44th Parliament, Bill C-244 , introduced by a Liberal member, addressed the issue of digital locks by allowing circumvention for the purpose of diagnosis, maintenance and repair. Also in the last Parliament, Bill C-294 , introduced by a Conservative member, addressed interoperability by allowing consumers and businesses to use third party parts, systems and devices without being blocked by copyright rules. Both bills received royal assent in 2024. Those were targeted changes. They focused on removing specific legal barriers that made repair more difficult.”
“That framework would include measures related to minimum useful life, labelling, access to parts, tools and repair information, replacement parts, technical documentation, software support and the responsibilities of manufacturers, importers and distributors. The bill also contemplates future legislative measures, including obligations on the industry, inspection mechanisms and penalties for non-compliance. That is a very broad scope. It goes well beyond simply helping Canadians fix what they own. It opens the door to a new federal regulatory framework over a wide range of consumer products, many of which are already subject to complex supply chains, international standards, safety requirements, warranties and provincial consumer protection laws.”
“Every single one of us gets frustrated when products break too soon, when repairs are difficult or when replacing an item seems easier than fixing it. Those concerns are real. Canadians should be able to repair the products they own, access reasonable repair options and receive clear information about the products they buy. However, the question before us is not whether durability and repairability are good things. The question is whether Bill C-267 is the right way to achieve them. On that question, Conservatives have serious concerns. Bill C-267 would require the Minister of Industry to develop a national framework on the durability and repairability of electronic products and essential home appliances offered for sale, distributed or sold in Canada, whether they are made here or imported.”
“Mr. Speaker, imagine a family standing in an appliance aisle because their washing machine has broken down. They are already dealing with higher grocery bills, higher mortgages, higher rent and higher utility costs. They are looking at the price tags and trying to make the best decision for their household. One model is more expensive but may last longer. Another is more affordable and fits their budget today. That family should have the freedom to make that choice. Bill C-267 , despite its good intentions, risks having Ottawa make that choice for them by creating a broad new regulatory framework that could increase costs, reduce options and make essential products less affordable for Canadians.”
“Madam Speaker, under the Liberal Prime Minister , Canada is the only G20 country to fall into a recession. Just by stopping the illegal dumping of cheap subsidized Chinese aluminum, the government could help aluminum extrusion companies be profitable, provide jobs for hard-working Canadians and put food on their tables. Will the Liberal Prime Minister tell aluminum workers that Canada is in a recession or just a technical recession?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has taken Canada into a recession, the only one in the G7. How does he respond? His latest inflight catering bill for only three flights was $195,000. That is enough to pay for 2,600 food hampers at a Windsor food bank, enough for 36,400 days. While the Liberal Prime Minister led us into recession, he dined on luxury inflight meals while Canadians were starving. How many more bad economic reports will it take for the Liberals to rein in their out-of-control, wasteful spending?”
“Mr. Speaker, the new section 232 tariffs are gutting our tool, mould and die companies in Windsor-Essex and across the country. These shops are vital to our manufacturing industry. Hundreds of thousands of skilled workers will lose their jobs. Where is the Liberal Prime Minister 's plan? Workers need results now in order to survive. When will the Prime Minister finally do his job, get to the table and put our workers first for a change?”
“Mr. Speaker, last year, the Prime Minister promised to end tariffs and fix our trade with the U.S., but he failed. This year, on April 6, section 232 tariffs increased dramatically and are putting up to 2.6 million Canadian jobs at risk. The Prime Minister calls our trade relationship a “weakness”, but the real weakness is his failure to make a deal. With millions of Canadian families at risk, when will the Prime Minister deliver results instead of more speeches, illusions and excuses?”
“It is only reasonable that Canadians have a clear understanding of these price tags before the framework is finalized. (1425) Federal strategies need to focus on delivering value for taxpayers by investing in solutions that improve outcomes, not just increase spending. If we are spending without any results, that is problematic. That is why Conservatives support the implementation of a rare disease strategy, not just a rare disease drug strategy.”
“As of August 2024, universal sickle cell disease screening has been implemented in all provinces except for Newfoundland and Labrador and the territories. From my point of view, the real opportunity here would be to focus on closing the remaining gaps, working with jurisdictions that have not yet implemented screening, and supporting them in a way that respects their unique circumstances. I am looking forward to discussions at committee about what collaboration can take place with Newfoundland and Labrador and the territories to make sure the screening can be implemented across all Canadian jurisdictions. There is also the question of how much taxpayer money the measures included in the bill would cost. To date there has been no estimate from the Parliamentary Budget Officer outlining the financial impact of the bill.”
“Similarly, Bill C-224 , the national framework on cancers linked to firefighting act, introduced in 2022 in the 44th Parliament, will “make recommendations respecting regular screenings for cancers linked to firefighting”, “promote information and knowledge sharing in relation to the prevention and treatment of cancers linked to firefighting” and “prepare a summary of existing standards that recognize cancers linked to firefighting as occupational diseases.” These are sound and balanced examples of legislation that promote more consistent care across Canada while respecting provincial jurisdiction and encouraging national knowledge sharing. Similar concerns come to mind as the framework seeks to “include measures to institute universal neonatal screening”.”
“However, standards of care are set by professional associations that operate under provincial jurisdiction. This is why it is essential that provinces and territories be fully engaged and that their perspectives shape any coordinated national approach. There are examples of other framework bills where guidance has been established for the care of people with a specific disease or class of diseases. For example, Bill C-442 , an act respecting a federal framework on Lyme disease, which was introduced in 2013 in the 41st Parliament, included a provision that mandated the establishment of guidelines regarding the prevention, identification, treatment and management of Lyme disease and the sharing of best practices throughout Canada.”
“Because of this, it is difficult to fully understand the scope of the condition, or for provinces to plan effectively for health care services and resource allocations so patients receive appropriate support across the country. Conservatives are proud to support sickle cell awareness. We voted to recognize June 19 as national sickle cell awareness day, as an important step in increasing visibility and understanding of this disease across the country. The bill would build on this awareness by including “measures to support public awareness campaigns on sickle cell disease and blood donation”. Despite the good intention of the legislation, there are several sections of the bill that raise questions. The bill seeks to “set evidence-based national standards for the diagnosis and treatment of sickle cell disease”.”
“Mr. Speaker, today parliamentarians are considering a measure to address a rare disease that affects thousands of Canadians, sickle cell disease. Bill S‑201 , the national framework on sickle cell disease act, is intended to take steps to ensure awareness and to ensure that the level of care for people with sickle cell disease across Canada is more aligned. Sickle cell disease is a lifetime genetic blood condition where red blood cells become hard and crescent-shaped instead of round. These misshapen cells can block blood flow, causing severe pain, infections and serious damage to organs over time. An estimated 6,500 people in Canada suffer from sickle cell disease. I say “estimated”, as we do not have an accurate count because there is not a national registry.”
“Mr. Speaker, young Canadians are being hit the hardest by this Liberal-created cost of living crisis. One in five Canadians aged 18 to 34 cannot even pay their tax bill without going into debt. At the same time, nearly 75% are cutting back on spending just to survive, and still the Liberals voted against the Conservative plan to lower taxes on gas and groceries. Why will the Liberals not cut taxes on gas and food to make life more affordable?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am not sure about those tariffs the member is talking about. What I do know is that we should not have any tariffs. We have enjoyed free trade between Canada and the United States for many years. We need a strong leader to go to bat and do those negotiations in Washington, which will bring about a free trade situation again.”
“Mr. Speaker, honestly, I agree with my colleague. I do not understand the Liberals' plan either. It benefits a foreign, hostile country by accepting imports of its vehicles and it gives an incentive to buy other foreign-made cars. When Canadians, who are not getting the jobs to build cars, need a car, they are going to dig deeper into their pockets to buy an electric vehicle that is being incentivized. It just does not make any sense to me whatsoever. We need to build cars and car parts in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, any improvement to the auto industry will affect any province across Canada that builds for the auto industry. In Quebec, they build for the auto industry. More cars being made means more work for those companies in Quebec and provinces across Canada that are producing parts for the auto industry, whether they do assembly in that province or not.”
“Mr. Speaker, if the Conservative Party starts making deals with other companies for production, we are going to tie those companies to agreements that will support workers. We are going to tie those agreements and that money to jobs. We are not going to just make contracts with companies without assurances that our workers will have jobs.”
“Canada can be a manufacturing powerhouse again. We have the workers, the resources and the history. What we need now is the leadership. That is what the motion represents, that is what the plan would deliver and that is why I urge all members of the House to support our motion, not only for my community but for our workers and the future of Canada's auto industry.”
“We will bring back production by taking Canada from 1.2 million vehicles per year back up to two million vehicles, not just restoring our auto industry but also restoring the promise that Canada is a place for opportunity. It is about giving Windsor workers not just hope but a future. I would say to the auto workers across Canada that Conservatives see them. We understand what is happening, and we are fighting for them. They are not alone. I, alongside my Conservative colleagues, will always stand up for our auto industry, and let me be clear: This is not just about an industry. It is about the thousands of families and other Canadians who depend on this sector's prosperity. A country that cannot build its own cars, maintain its production and create more jobs is a country that has lost control of the future.”
“Allowing vehicles connected to hostile regimes into our market is not just bad economics but also a national security risk. If members will not take my word for it, they should ask why the Minister of Industry will not say that she would drive a foreign-made car. It is because she knows it is a major security risk and threat, not just to herself but to every Canadian. This is the difference between a Conservative government that believes in Canada, and our current Liberal government, which has given up. The Liberals' approach not only welcomes but subsidizes foreign production, accepts tariffs and pushes a false narrative that this will benefit Canadians. Our approach is simple. We build here, we buy here and we protect our communities.”
“Third, it would protect North American supply chains by maintaining a 75% North American content rule under CUSMA, which would ensure that production stays here and not overseas. Fourth, the plan would stand firm against unfair trade by aligning with our North American partners to confront state-subsidized Chinese electric vehicle imports that will undercut our industry. Finally, it would strengthen our national security by ensuring that vehicles operating on Canadian roads are not connected to the software systems of foreign companies. Let us be clear: The Liberal government knows that these modern vehicles are not just machines but also data systems. They collect location data, behavioural data and infrastructure data.”
“These Canadians, who once had a promise that if they worked hard they would have a stable life, are now experiencing mass job losses in Brampton, Oshawa, Ingersoll and Sainte-Thérèse. Supply chains are unstable, and livelihoods are at risk. My community and workers across Canada should not have to wake up every day wondering if they are next. Auto workers are asking this simple question: “Who's fighting for us?” Our Conservative auto strategy answers that question. First, it supports a plan that would make it affordable to buy Canadian vehicles by removing the GST on Canadian-made cars, putting our workers first. Second, it would restore balance to production by ensuring that if a company wants to sell in Canada, it must build in Canada on a dollar-for-dollar basis.”
“Today we have the opposite: a government that has accepted tariffs as permanent; a government that has failed to secure access to our largest market, the United States; and a government that is actively subsidizing foreign-built vehicles while Canadian auto jobs in Oshawa, Brampton, Ingersoll and Sainte-Thérèse disappear. Families and auto workers in Windsor are worried they will be next. (1305) Windsor is not just another city; it is one of the most auto-dependent regions in the entire country. Tens of thousands of jobs in Windsor-Essex are directly and indirectly tied to the auto sector. When a shift is cut in Windsor, it is not just a factory issue. It also affects spinoff jobs, restaurants, small businesses, suppliers and entire communities.”
“That is not an industrial strategy. That is an industrial surrender. Conservatives are not and never will be willing to back down from this fight, so why is the government ready to lie down when our workers most need its support? I am begging for the Liberal government to adopt our motion today, because we know it would work. In 1965, Canada entered the Canada-United States auto pact. That agreement tied production to market access. If a company wanted to sell vehicles in Canada, it had to build vehicles in Canada. The results were transformative: Auto production in Canada grew from roughly 700,000 vehicles annually in the mid-1960s to nearly three million vehicles by the late 1990s. That was not an accident. It was because Canada had a strategy that ensured that Canadian workers benefited from Canadian demand.”
“Last year alone, nearly another 6,000 jobs were lost in our auto sector. That means that during the 10 years that the Liberal government has been in power, it has managed to decimate our auto industry by nearly half. That is not a transition. That is a failure of Liberal government, yet what has been the government's response? Instead of defending Canadian workers, it has doubled down on failed policies that subsidize foreign production. My Conservative colleagues and I will never stand for this, and I promise I will always defend and stand up for our auto industry. Today nearly 90% of vehicles sold in Canada are imported. Canadians are buying cars, but we are not building them. Now, under the current government, Canadians are being asked to use their tax dollars to subsidize the purchase of those imported vehicles.”
“Today, unfortunately, those workers are watching their livelihood slip away, not because they failed but because the Liberal government failed them. In 2016, Canada produced approximately 2.4 million vehicles. Today that number has collapsed to 1.2 million vehicles, nearly cut in half. Over the same period, production in competing countries has remained stable or even increased. Meanwhile, here in Canada under the Liberal government, our industry has been gutted to fill the needs of foreign manufacturing, and workers in Windsor, Oshawa, Brampton, Ingersoll and Sainte-Thérèse are being expected to watch. In fact, employment in vehicle assembly has declined significantly over the last decade. In 2015, roughly 32,700 Canadians worked in assembly plants. By 2024, that number had dropped to about 23,700.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise today in strong support of today's Conservative auto strategy. For far too long, Canadian and Windsor auto workers have been tossed aside because the government is subsidizing foreign electric vehicles and standing by as thousands of Canadian auto jobs vanish, all while prioritizing everyone but our own workers. Despite this, I have good news. Today's Conservative auto strategy is simple. It is about auto workers and their families in Windsor and across our beautiful country. For generations, Windsor has been the beating heart of our auto industry. It is not just a manufacturing region; it is the place I proudly call home. Thousands of families do as well because they want to build their lives around stable, well-paying automotive jobs.”
“I will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our workers and fight relentlessly to protect our industry and the livelihoods it supports.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the people of Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, who are counting on me to defend their jobs and their future. I am here to fight to protect our workers and the automotive industry that sustains our community. On Monday, Liberals and the Bloc voted down the Conservative motion that would have strengthened Canada's automotive sector. For our community, that decision is deeply concerning. Windsor is highly dependent on a strong auto industry to keep a robust and healthy local economy. By defeating this motion, the House missed an opportunity to provide certainty and stability for our local manufacturing and our economic growth. The ripple effects will be felt across our community, in workplaces, in storefronts and around kitchen tables.”
“George, who dedicate themselves to strengthening their community. Another friend, Khassan Saka, founded an organization that helps Iraqi and other immigrants settle in Windsor. Every person I have mentioned is a hard worker. Everyone has excelled and everyone has enriched our city through their efforts, generosity and commitment. Many more names could be mentioned as examples of how our society has benefited from these hard-working new Arab Canadians. This bill would not create new bureaucracy, cost taxpayers money or tell anyone how to live. It would simply acknowledge a reality that already exists. Windsor knows what happens when people are given the freedom to succeed. Arab Canadians have helped build my city and this country, one business, one family, one meal and one neighbourhood at a time.”
“I hired Adel, a talented chef from Egypt with skills in Italian cooking. Through hard work, he built a life here, marrying a Canadian teacher and raising a wonderful family. I also hired Hassan at one of my venues, a large nightclub. He started young, worked hard and quickly became head of security. He built and owns a multi-million dollar company, proof of what dedication and effort can achieve. Then there is my friend Tony, whose parents opened a pita bread bakery many years ago. They worked tirelessly to provide a life for their family. Tony is now an electrical engineer; he is deeply involved in Windsor, volunteering on boards and with charitable and political organizations. He is a pillar of our community. I cannot leave out the Chaldean community, leaders like Adel, Salman and Dr.”
“They speak English with a Windsor accent, sometimes mixed with Arabic, at home. They are not separate from the community. They are the community. That is why Bill S-227 matters. The bill is not about division or special treatment; it is about recognition. It is about saying that this community matters, that its contributions matter and that its story belongs in the Canadian story. For young Arab Canadians growing up in Canada, that recognition counts. It tells them they do not have to choose between who they are and where they live. They can be proud of their heritage and proud to be Canadian. For everyone else, it is a reminder of what makes this country work: hard work, family, community and responsibility. I have seen this first-hand as an entrepreneur in the hospitality business.”
“They opened small businesses with family support and worked long hours. They did what Windsor families have always done. They made sacrifices so their kids would not have to. (1720) We should also be honest about this: Not everyone came here by choice. Some were fleeing war, conflict or instability. They arrived carrying loss: the loss of homes, the loss of careers and sometimes the loss of loved ones. Still, they believed in Canada. They believed that if they worked hard, this country would give them a fair shot, and Canada did just that. Today, Arab Canadians are raising families in Windsor and across Canada. They volunteer, coach sports teams, support local charities and run businesses that keep our neighbourhoods alive. Their kids go to school with our kids. They argue about hockey like everyone else.”
“At community events and festivals, we will see traditional dance, live music and celebrations that are open to the whole city. They are not closed off or exclusive. They are shared. That matters, because culture is not preserved by locking it away; it is preserved by living it and by inviting others to experience it. That is exactly what the Arab Canadians in Windsor and Tecumseh have done. Many came here with strong education and skills. There were engineers, doctors, teachers, tradespeople and entrepreneurs, but when they arrived, it was not easy. Credentials did not always transfer. Language barriers existed. Some had to take jobs below their training just to get started. Some had to start over completely. Still, they pushed forward. They went back to school. They retrained. They worked nights and weekends.”
“They opened restaurants serving shawarma, falafel, manakish , kebabs and hummus, food that is meant to be shared and that brings people together. In Arab culture, food is not only about eating, but also about hospitality. It is about generosity. It is about making room for others. We do not rush a meal. We invite people in. We make sure everyone is welcome. That spirit shows up in Windsor. We will see people from every background sitting side by side in these restaurants. Students, workers and families are all welcome and all treated the same. That is what real integration looks like. Beyond food, there is music, cafes and community life, where people gather to talk, debate, laugh and stay connected, places where elders pass down stories and where young people blend cultures naturally.”
“Today, Arabic is the third most spoken language in my home city of Windsor, Ontario, after English and French. That tells us something important. It tells us that Arab Canadians are not on the margins of our city, but woven into everyday life, at work, at school, in business and in our neighbourhoods. We can see that clearly along Wyandotte Street, in what many of us call the Arabic village. If we walk down that street, we do not just see businesses; we feel community. We smell fresh bread coming out of the bakeries early in the morning. We see families gathered in restaurants late in the evening. We hear Arabic music drifting out of cafes, sometimes traditional, sometimes modern and sometimes mixed with North American sounds. All of this did not happen by accident or because of a government plan; it happened because people took risks.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in support of Bill S-227 , a bill that would recognize April as Arab heritage month in Canada. This matters to Arab Canadians, especially in a city like mine, Windsor. Windsor has always been a working city, a city built by people who showed up ready to work, people who believed that, if one put in the effort, they could build something better for their family. Arab Canadians are part of that story. Families came here from Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Egypt and across the Arab world. Some arrived decades ago; others arrived more recently. They came looking for stability, for opportunity, for a future their kids could count on. They did not come expecting an easy road, and they did not get one, but they worked, adapted and built lives here in Canada.”
“Madam Speaker, I am not sure if the member across the aisle understands my question. Five thousand Canadian auto workers lost their job. The government's response is to hand out subsidies for American-built electric vehicles. I am imploring the member across the aisle to answer the question: Instead of subsidizing foreign-made cars and killing Canadian auto jobs, will the Liberals adopt our Conservative plan to take the tax off cars made in Canada?”
“Madam Speaker, yesterday's announcement of a new national automotive strategy was nothing more than a slap in the face to Windsor's auto workers. The Prime Minister proudly announced that Canadians will now be subsidizing American-made vehicles. Why do the Liberals think that it is better to subsidize foreign-made vehicles rather than to adopt the Conservative plan to cut the tax on cars made in Windsor, in Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, 1,200 more auto workers in Oshawa just lost their jobs. Brampton workers are still waiting on the Liberals to respond to their 3,000 jobs that were lost. Windsor thrives on auto manufacturing and now we are left worried about our future. The Liberals promised a deal for Canadians. They promised to defend Canadian jobs, but every week, the government fails on all accounts. When will the Liberals stop their pointless photo ops and get real results for the thousands of auto workers who have lost their jobs?”
“It cannot help a family planning a food budget over an entire year, and it certainly cannot help seniors, students or working parents who are already stretched to their breaking point. Every dollar the government spends comes out of the pockets of Canadians, and they are feeling this more and more every time they enter a grocery store. Conservatives will provide for permanent affordability so hard work once again means a good life, a home Canadians can afford and healthy food on the table, not a fake process of clarifying grocery store prices.”
“It does not lower the cost of food production, transportation or retail; reduce fuel costs; or fix broken supply chains. It certainly does not make food more affordable next week, next month or next year. In fact temporary rebates often have the opposite effect. When governments recklessly put cash into an economy without addressing supply issues, prices continue to rise. Families receive a short-term cheque, but they are left paying the higher grocery bills. The rebate fades, but the inflation does not. It gives the appearance of action without delivering real affordability. I ask the members across the floor to be honest with Canadians. A rebate that lasts a few months cannot keep pace with the grocery prices that rise every single day.”
“As we have already seen in Quebec, where detailed price display rules were introduced, governments were forced to delay implementation after retailers warned of confusion, cost and complexity. The lesson is obvious: Out-of-touch legislation does not cancel out bad economics. Conservatives are not opposing transparency; we are opposing symbolic politics that raise costs while pretending to help. When confronted with this growing crisis, the Liberal government's answer has been to point to a temporary GST rebate increase and claim that help is on the way. However, as The Canadian SHIELD Institute has made clear, this approach is nothing more than a band-aid on a wound that the government keeps reopening. A one-time rebate does nothing to stop grocery prices from rising in the first place.”