Shuvaloy Majumdar
Calgary Heritage, Alberta · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, 1867 brought a sacred covenant, with free people governing themselves, rising above region and religion and building a sovereign nation on ordered liberty, under laws we wrote ourselves. That promise was betrayed by decades of central control. The Laurentian consensus treated provinces as problems to manage.”
“Ours is a federation of equal partners and a vital contribution to the most successful civilization in history. It is being dismantled and it must be restored. The choice is clear. Either we decline as a grievance-ridden middle power under central control or reclaim the strength and ambition of a rising major power.”
“Mr. Speaker, we have laws and basic standards to hold those responsible for slavery accountable in Canadian supply chains. Canadian law requires the government to table the anti-slavery report from the ombudsman every year. It has refused to do so for three straight years. Why does the government keep breaking the law?”
“Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honour the life of Bobbie Sparrow, who passed away in February at the age of 90. Bobbie earned respect through a lifetime of service and of unwavering fidelity to her principles.”
“It is the product of a confident Arab leadership, not imported dogma. It is therefore unsurprising that the clerical military regime in Tehran, whose revolutionary ideology has relied on exporting instability and targeting pragmatic Arab success stories, has directed proxy attacks and threats against the UAE in recent years.”
“Grand ideologies, whether imported socialism dressed as pan-Arab unity or political Islamism promising moral regeneration, have repeatedly subordinated practical governance and individual agency to abstractions with measurable costs in human welfare and stability.”
The complete record
Every one of 137 lines we hold for Shuvaloy Majumdar, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 3.
“Generosity without fairness is not generosity; it is betrayal. Before the new year, I had a neighbour write to me deeply concerned about the federal budget and public health care. She told me she was worried that the federal government had said very little about improving our health care system. She asked me, in no uncertain terms, how we would help to ensure that Canadians got the care they needed. Her concerns are not unique. Her story is one of millions. That is why we are presenting a motion that would restore fairness. Rejected asylum claimants would receive emergency life-saving care only. Canadians come first, full stop. The soaring costs and abuse of the Liberal IFH program are no accident. They are the predictable result of a Liberal government that has broken our immigration system. Hospitals are full.”
“By 2030, it is projected to cost $1.5 billion annually for people who have already been rejected as asylum claimants, people who have never paid taxes and people who have no legal right to be here. At the health committee, Conservatives discovered that providers are charging up to five times the provincial rate for services for these individuals. Meanwhile, our own people wait months for a specialist. Seniors wait for procedures that could literally change their lives. Families wait in emergency rooms because they cannot find a primary care physician who could keep them out of those emergency rooms, which would be a great relief to our health system and our hospitals. What do the Liberals do? They write blank checks for people who are not even contributing members of our society.”
“Rejected asylum claimants are getting health care benefits that Canadians themselves cannot even access, deluxe benefits like vision care, physiotherapy and supplementary services, and that is where the real outrage begins. The Liberals opened the border, and then they abandoned screening, rubber-stamped soaring asylum claims and let the backlog spiral completely out of control. Now Canada's health care, housing and job markets are at their breaking points. Their backlog of asylum claims has exploded by over 2,900% since they took office in 2015. The Liberal interim federal health program cost $211 million four years ago. Today, it costs $896 million.”
“In this speech, I want to lay out three main points: first, fairness in health care; second, equality before the law; and third, the defence of our national identity and sovereignty. Let us start with a system that is already at its breaking point: health care. Six million Canadians cannot find a family doctor. That is not a number on a page. That is a senior down the street. It is a single mom waiting for hours in an overcrowded emergency department. They are our family members, our friends and our neighbours. Thirty weeks is how long the average Canadian must wait to see a specialist. That is seven months of waiting, seven months of pain and seven months where life hangs in the balance, yet the Liberal government chooses to prioritize people who do not even belong here.”
“Mr. Speaker, who are we? Are we a nation that is defined by a collection of grievances? Are we a nation where one set of rules applies to one citizen and another to someone undermining that very sense of citizenship? Nations are defined and defended by knowing who they are, their history, their traditions and the laws that shape their societies and their culture. When a government undertakes a political project to revise a national history and its identity with Marxist philosophies, grievance culture and borders open to those who are here to actively undermine the people through extortion or through terrorism, that is a state-sponsored attack on the very concept of Canada itself.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition signed by Canadians. The petitioners note that the budget implementation act would grant cabinet ministers sweeping powers to secretly exempt companies or individuals from federal laws, powers that were never disclosed or contemplated in the budget itself. Accordingly, the petitioners call on the government to remove these provisions and restore Canada's long-standing financial standards, transparency and fiscal integrity.”
“To those carrying the country on their backs and feeling unseen, underappreciated and overworked, Conservatives see them. Conservatives will fight for them, and we will restore the promise of Canada for them.”
“Mr. Speaker, with hope and unity, and rhetoric over results, Conservatives are returning to Ottawa ready to fight for Canadians. This weekend's convention sent a clear message with nearly 90% from across our country supporting our leader , which is a landslide mandate for unity, hope and results. We can contrast that with 10 years of Liberal failure. Housing is out of reach. Food is unaffordable. Crime is rampant, and immigration is broken. The Prime Minister changed the rhetoric, but not the reality. He grows government, divides Canadians and blocks projects. Conservatives empower people. We would cut taxes, cut red tape, lower costs, unlock our potential and our ingenuity, and get our resources to market. This is the momentum we are seeing from Calgary, united around work, family and country.”
“When foreign governments intimidate or threaten individuals on Canadian soil, it is not only a violation of the rights of the people affected but also a test of the strength of our laws and our institutions. Bill C-219 would ensure that Canada responds firmly, transparently and consistently. To people who have sought refuge in Canada, to those who live in fear of foreign regimes, and to Canadians who expect their government to defend their sovereignty, the bill would deliver clarity, protection and accountability. It is now the responsibility of the House to act. Support for Bill C-219 is support for the rule of law, for victims of oppression and for Canada as a safe and principled country. May the bill not be a partisan one but pass as a parliamentary one instead.”
“Whether people are Sikh, Hindu, Christian, Muslim or Jew, and whether they come from Hong Kong, the Donbass, Tibet or East Turkestan, or are among the Iranians who stand against their regime, all who come here to live in freedom now must contend with the designs of the dictators they fled. Immediate family members of the very people we have sanctioned have lived in luxury in Canada while their relatives engage in corruption, theft or violent repression abroad. The tragedy of flight PS752 is a stark example. Families of the victims have waited years for compensation, despite frozen regime assets that could have been used to provide justice. Russian assets could and should be directed to supporting Ukraine in its defence. Frozen funds should contribute to justice and accountability for people whose war for existence is waged this very day.”
“This is the heart of the legislation: a line drawn clearly, without drama and without hesitation, a country's stating that its sovereignty is not for negotiation and its people are not for intimidation. Transnational repression is a direct threat to the safety and dignity of people living here in Canada. It is carried out by regimes in Beijing, the Kremlin, Tehran and beyond. Our intelligence community documents that these governments have conducted operations across Canada, including intimidation; surveillance; harassment of activists, students and journalists; and persecution of diaspora communities.”
“Democracies came together because they recognized that a system that allows corruption, torture and murder to flourish unchallenged is a system that eventually threatens us all. The legislation before the House carries that same spirit; it connects the struggle of one man in a Moscow prison to the safety of a Canadian family in Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary or Montreal. When we act, we are not only honouring Magnitsky's courage but also reminding the world that Canada is not passive in the face of cruelty. We are reminding people who fled oppression that this country takes their safety seriously, and we are reminding people who inflict oppression that they will face consequences even if they believe their borders protect them.”
“They run through the inboxes of activists who are told their families back home will suffer. They run through the hearts of communities of people who came to Canada believing they had escaped the regime, only to find that the regime had followed them here. If we do not draw a line now, we teach these regimes that Canada can be bent, that our values can be shaped by intimidation, and that our borders are something they can violate. This is why we strengthen Magnitsky powers. This is why we direct them at transnational repression. This is why we sharpen the law into something that cannot be evaded with excuses or hidden behind diplomatic language. Magnitsky's legacy is not only about his death; it is about the world that responded to it.”
“(1830) Renaming the Special Economic Measures Act to the Sergei Magnitsky global sanctions act is part of that clarity. There is power in naming something after a man who died telling the truth. It signals that the purpose of the law is not hidden behind technical language or bureaucratic jargon; it is a law built around a moral line that should never have been blurred. The name teaches every Canadian what the law stands for and tells every authoritarian what it means when Canada acts. The Cold War had a clarity that many in our era have forgotten. It drew a line between the world of fear and the world of freedom. Today the battle lines are not marked on maps, but they are just as real. They run through the phones of dissidents who receive threats at midnight.”
“We cannot talk about this without talking about the world we now live in, a world in which authoritarians are emboldened by new technologies. What once required secret agents crossing borders now only requires a phone, a television, a consulate or a proxy group operating quietly in our communities. Transnational repression is not abstract theory. It is happening in cities across the country, and it targets the people who trusted Canada to give them what their homelands denied them: safety, a voice and freedom. If authoritarian states can reach into our cities to intimidate their critics, then we no longer control the space we claim as our own. That is why the response cannot be symbolic or slow; it must be predictable enough that dictators understand the cost before they act and swift enough that victims understand they are not alone.”
“Magnitsky's story is not simply a tale of courage; it is a reminder that one person armed with the truth can expose an entire system of lies. His murder was meant to frighten others into silence, but instead it triggered an international movement that forced democracies to confront a hard question about themselves: Do we still believe in moral consequence, or are we willing to let power excuse anything? That is what makes today's debate more than a matter of policy. It is a statement about who Canadians choose to be in an age when authoritarian regimes think the world has grown too tired, too distracted or too divided to stand up to them. Our answer must be calm, clear and confident. Canada will not retreat from its role as a defender of those who risk everything to speak truth in countries where truth is treated as a crime.”
“There are death threats, bounties, covert police stations and intimidation of dissidents, all on our soil. This is not mere crime; this is transnational repression, the export of tyranny into the heart of the free world. Thanks to the persistence over a decade by the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman , we already had established human rights violations as Magnitsky powers almost a decade ago. We must now sharpen them into a dedicated tool to confront transnational repression with swift, automatic and merciless consequences for any regime that dares hunt its critics on Canadian streets. In the Cold War, we drew a line and said “not one inch further”. Today, we must say the same. Canada will never be a hunting ground for dictators. We will find them, we will freeze their assets and we will make them pay.”
“Current laws have not kept up with the tactics of these regimes. Bill C-219 provides clarity, accountability and enforcement mechanisms. It would prevent Canada from being used as a safe haven by individuals responsible for corruption and human rights abuses. Let me cover three parts of this issue in my remarks: the context, why this legislation is critical and our duty as parliamentarians. Sergei Magnitsky was tortured to death for exposing Kremlin corruption and, from his grave, gave the free world its most potent weapon against the new authoritarians: targeted sanctions that strike the torturers, the kleptocrats and their enablers where it hurts most, their bank accounts and their visas. Today, the long arm of Beijing, Tehran, Moscow and their proxies reach into Canada itself.”
“To stand with him on this legislation not only recognizes the urgency of the issue before us, but also honours the dedication and leadership he brings before this House. He has championed measures to protect Canadians and to confront the very real threat posed by authoritarian regimes that seek to project their influence into our own communities. This bill would enable the Canadian government to confront, in addition to human rights abusers, dictator corruption and transnational repression. Across our country, people who have fled persecution and violence rightly expect to be safe. They expect their homes to be sanctuaries, free from the nightmare of the dictator they now deny, yet reports show that authoritarian regimes are following their citizens into Canada to intimidate, to coerce and to silence them. This is real; it is ongoing.”
“Madam Speaker, from my days as an adviser for the Harper government to today, I have had the privilege of working alongside the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman on several files, observing first-hand his steadfast commitment to human rights, accountability and the rule of law. Throughout his career, he has consistently demonstrated a deep understanding of international affairs, a tireless work ethic and a principled approach to defending Canadian values. I have seen it up front as we walked the cobblestone streets of Kyiv amid jubilant protesters, and then later amid burned buildings and the same stones ripped from the ground in self-defence. He does not act for political convenience; he acts with clarity, conviction and a sense of responsibility to Canadians and those whose freedoms are imperilled.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the incredible work he does on behalf of the great people he represents. The United States and Europe are obsessed with building critical economic and energy infrastructure, not just the stuff to extract from the ground but also stuff to provide value to it and then export it abroad. Canada cannot get its act together on the basic number of projects it must approve, while the United States and the European Union are moving ahead at lightning speed with pipelines, ports, rail, road and everything else that is needed. That is the kind of determination our government needs to bring. That is the kind of determination the government has never delivered.”
“In fact he has conceded to the President and to the United States on tariffs, on investment in America and on everything the President really wants, but he is not driving toward concluding a deal. In fact he is weakening the Canadian position by not definitively delivering the resources this country needs to be independent of American leverage. Canada wants a good partnership with the United States ultimately, and we will always focus on negotiating a good deal, but we can do so only from a position of strength.”
“Mr. Speaker, I understand that my friend, my hon. colleague, and I have our disagreements about how we can make our country prosperous by unleashing our natural resources. I want to unleash natural resources to help Quebeckers and to help the province of Quebec succeed in this country and this world. Their ports, their energy, their infrastructure and their industriousness are incredible and should play a bigger part in our country's self-reliance and sovereignty. However, I also agree with our colleague about the smokescreen in Washington. It is interesting that the Prime Minister put up a strong front during the campaign about how he was going to challenge Donald Trump and achieve a trade deal, but within minutes he took a different position altogether.”
“Mr. Speaker, not only is controlling spending, and doing it responsibly, critical for every taxpayer; growing the economy is a critical part of our own sovereignty, our self-reliance and our independence, irrespective of whatever government is in Washington. Canadians need a government ready to make transformational decisions, from pipelines to ports and energy corridors. They need investment facilities to invest in that are tax-free, in order to build this country. Canadians need the big ideas that the Conservatives ran on and the Liberals tried to replicate, so irrespective of the Liberals' using Washington as a drama and a smokescreen to hide and shield their ideology and indecision, Conservatives would deliver a government that would actually unlock the potential of this country.”
“We will reward hard work and create the conditions for higher wages, stronger paycheques, affordable homes and renewed confidence. The promise of Canada is not gone. It lives in the single mother keeping her family afloat. It lives in the seniors who built the country. It lives in the newcomers and young people who still believe in what Canada could be. They deserve a future they can count on, a country that works harder for them and a government that respects the sacrifices they make every single day. Conservatives will deliver that.”
“With the Liberals, costs will not retreat to those levels. Work will not return to that simplicity. The sense of control Canadians once felt is fleeting. Unless something fundamental changes, the forces driving their insecurity will remain. The budget was supposed to give Canadians back control over their lives. Liberals spent the entire campaign harvesting Conservative ideas as their own and are now failing to deliver on any of them, despite having the support of Conservatives. The budget was a wasted opportunity. At a moment when the country needed seriousness, ambition and leadership, Canadians were handed more spending, more debt, more excuses and more government. Conservatives will deliver the fundamental change that restores control for Canadians.”
“The country needed a historic budget with big, bold decisions that would unlock our potential, decisions that would break the mindset of middling and declining thinking and replace it with the ambition of a major and rising power, a nation pitched to meet the test of this age. Canadians are managing the emotional weight of having lost the only period in recent memory when they felt financially secure and felt a sense of security. This was a decade ago, after Stephen Harper rebuilt the economy, built corridors for trade to every part of the planet and restored a self-confident country at peace with itself. The pandemic gave people a temporary, albeit false, sense of stability. The return now to a more expensive and unpredictable world has only intensified a mindset that was already growing well before COVID.”
“We would restore investment and make Canada competitive again. We would put money back into Canadians' paycheques and pensions. Above all, we would use what is in the ground beneath us to unleash our natural resources through national corridors and major infrastructure that would change the game for every single Canadian. This is how to make life affordable again, not with expensive slogans, such as “generational investment”, but with an affordable budget and a bold plan that rewards work and restores opportunity. I just want to take a step back and place the budget in the context of the last decade. This was supposed to be a historic budget.”
“It is the listener at home who is paying the price for the government's failure to manage the economy. Opportunities are shrinking. Jobs are disappearing. People are leaving the country because the environment for business is hostile and expensive. Along with our dollar, our talent drains south. It is one thing to have a deficit. It is another to destroy the very foundation of a productive and growth economy that creates jobs and opportunity. Every Canadian who works, saves, invests or dreams of starting a family is paying a price. Conservatives have offered a clear, practical path forward. We have said that we will work with anyone from any party to make life affordable and to restore Canada's promise. We would end the industrial carbon tax in all its forms. We would cut wasteful spending to lower inflation, debt and taxes.”
“Families are paying for spending, not services. The government calls these numbers manageable or necessary. What they are is simply a tax on hard work, with nothing being provided in return. Canadians are being asked to bear the cost of spending they did not vote for and cannot afford. Private sector business investment is collapsing. High taxes, red tape and corporate welfare have driven $500 billion, half a trillion dollars, south of the border. In Washington, before President Trump, the Prime Minister shamelessly announced this as a Canadian investment. It is capital flight from an over-regulated market that he presides over. Businesses are leaving because the country is no longer stable, predictable or competitive. It is not just businesses hurting.”
“That is $16 billion more than promised. Spending is out of control. The Liberals would be adding $990 billion in new commitments, costing the average Canadian family $5,400 more a year. How many families have $5,400 kicking around to spend on the Prime Minister 's best friends and pet projects? The interest on our debt would be more than the amount transferred for health care to all the provinces combined. Here is another way to think about it. The next time people buy something, they can look at the GST on their receipt. The GST on every single payment they make all year, and the GST of every Canadian for the whole year, would still not cover the Prime Minister 's deficit. (1700) Every GST dollar now goes directly to Bay Street bankers and foreign bondholders rather than hospital beds, nurses' overtime or family doctors.”
“When asked about President Trump's tariffs, the Prime Minister shrugged and said, “Who cares?” This is not leadership; it is indifference. The Liberals are only saddling people who are currently struggling and future generations with insurmountable debt. Bob Cochlan, down the street from me back home, wrote this morning with a way to think about what a billion actually is. He said, “If I give you $1 billion and you stand on a street corner handing out $1 per second, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, you would still not have handed out $1 billion after 31 years.... The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about whether you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money.” Bob is 100% right. The government promised a deficit of $62 billion. The reality would be $78.3 billion.”
“Now, it is up to 800 households every single day. We can let that sink in. In one of the richest countries in the world, in 2025, working Canadians with full-time jobs are lining up at food banks because they can no longer afford to feed their kids on what they earn. It is not a recession; it is a national disgrace. One in five Canadians is skipping meals to make their food last longer. Canadians are choosing the pay-later option on Amazon or Afterpay for essentials. This is a single mom in Bridlewood, unsure if she can keep her home. It is a senior in Shawnessy whose pension is being eaten away by inflation. It is the newcomer or young couple in Millrise whose dream of home ownership is slipping further out of reach. What does the government say to these Canadians?”
“Every additional dollar borrowed today adds to the costs of housing, groceries, heating and sending a child to school. Every dollar borrowed today will be paid back in greater amounts tomorrow by the very people the government claims to protect. The message of the budget is clear: Canadians are being asked to sacrifice so that the government can spend more on itself. Canadians are asked to tighten their belts so that the Liberals can waste their future. This is the harsh reality of a budget that puts numbers before people, ideology before families and spending before responsibility. Two million Canadians now rely on food banks every month. The Calgary Food Bank is seeing record increases in the number of individuals who are relying on it. In 2019, the food bank was distributing food hampers to 250 families every day.”
“Every Canadian family is on the hook. Every dollar borrowed today will have to be repaid tomorrow with interest. When the government members say our younger generation must sacrifice more, they are not speaking in abstract terms. They are speaking about real Canadians who now face real consequences. They are speaking about my neighbours, the students starting their career, the couple hoping to buy their first home and the young family saving a few dollars each month to make ends meet. It is a government asking people to make sacrifices today, all while it continues to spend as though there is no tomorrow. Let us be clear: This is not a minor miscalculation. It is a deliberate decision to spend beyond the means of Canadian families and pass the bill on to the next generation. Every additional dollar borrowed today adds to inflation.”
“Mr. Speaker, “Spend less, [earn] more”, they said. “Build Canada strong”, they said; “generational investment”, they said. Objectively, the Liberals would spend more on operating expenses, not less. Objectively, they would build more bureaucracies, not actual projects. Objectively, they would build generational debt that would deny an entire generation of Canadians, all of our young people, the future they were promised. Imagine never paying one's credit card bill. Imagine opening up a statement and seeing charges piled up, with no plan to ever pay them down. Imagine being told that the decisions we take, the sacrifices we make and the future we hope for no longer matter because somebody else is running up our tab. That is exactly what the budget does. It would create a nearly $80-billion deficit with no credible plan to balance.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians want an affordable budget and an affordable life, not a prime minister who profits in secret while people line up at food banks in record numbers, since $6.5 billion is how much experts say the Prime Minister 's former company, Brookfield, sheltered in offshore tax havens over the last five years. The Prime Minister helped set up three multi-billion dollar investment funds in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, funds he stands to benefit directly from through bonus pay. Canadians deserve to know that the Prime Minister is making decisions in the public interest, not his own financial interest. Liberals can keep protecting their boss. Conservatives will stand with taxpayers. We will expose the abuse. We will defend hard-working Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am a proud colleague of the hon. member for Calgary Crowfoot . He serves his constituents incredibly well, including two retired people in the northwest of Calgary, and I am grateful for his service and hard work. The list of Liberal transgressions and corruption is taller than I am. I am not particularly tall in stature, but it is longer than my leg, longer than height that I possess of five feet, six inches, and it is longer than the The Iliad . We could talk for a long time about Liberal corruption. Conservatives are perpetually elected to restore trust in government and provide transparency and integrity. That is what we will do when we win the next election.”
“The government has not shown an honest partnership with opposition parties in trying to make progress for the people and succeed as a democracy. The government has, instead, offered up barriers and bait-and-switch games legislatively. In committees, government members slow down the opportunity to hold people accountable by pursuing transparency and understanding the model of how they do so today.”
“Mr. Speaker, the government has had the support of opposition parties on a series of priorities. If the government wanted to provide energy corridors to unlock this country's enormous potential, it could decide to table the bills and do so immediately. If the government was serious about bail reform, as the member indicated, the government could have tabled a bill in the first week back in Parliament and got the job done, saving thousands of Canadians from the crime and chaos that affect them on the streets. If the government was serious about transparency and openness, it could have done this from the very beginning by making decisions that would not cast a cloud over every major decision it is making from this point forward.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would perhaps suggest that the hon. member listen to my remarks because I complimented the Prime Minister on his past. I made certain that I not make this about his character, but rather, the need for his decisions to provide the public with transparency. The Prime Minister has not been embracing the concept of transparency or sunlight when it comes to his personal finances. Since the day he was elected Liberal leader, ran in the election and was sworn in as Prime Minister, only in the aftermath of the election did he provide an opportunity to understand exactly what his personal financial interests are. Public service is a high calling. It is an opportunity for all of us to sacrifice for the benefit of our country by offering transparency so we can build the trust that Canadians need.”
“If this is truly a new government, as the exact same Liberals claim, then they should prove it, flip the page on Liberal corruption and be transparent with Canadians. Should they not want to close these loopholes? Should they not want our people to know that decisions are made in the public's best interest, not in the partisan interests of the Prime Minister or for his personal enrichment? With that, I will conclude my comments. I hope this Parliament and this chamber pass the amendment we proposed today.”
“The Prime Minister is in Asia this week without a single deal to offer the Asian markets that have lined up for our resources. They want to end their reliance on dirty dictator energy. They want to partner with Canada on our resources, the most cleanly cultivated in the entire world with the most stable market for long-term partnerships. However, he did not arrive in Asia for the purpose of doing this, but in anticipation of a meeting with the leadership of Beijing to try to deepen a deal with bad actors. The decisions made when the Prime Minister looks at the ethics of our country and the screens he sets up, not just to incentivize himself, are for the national interests of our country, the prosperity of our people and, indeed, the security of our western security architecture. That is why this is important.”
“The Prime Minister is now ensconced in not just one trade war but two with the United States, which were uncalled for and require Canada to stand strong and united, but he is not turning to resolving a deal with the United States. Instead, he is creating strategic partnerships with the world's biggest rivals in Beijing. The People's Republic of China does not deserve a strategic partnership with Canada. It deserves strategic concern on a range of issues that touch on natural resources, data, technology and the economic growth of our country. For all of these issues, the Prime Minister will be making massive infrastructure decisions with respect to the future of our country, and he, himself, may be personally incentivized in them. Finally, there is the unleashing of our resources.”
“It is not the kind of trust that we would expect to see built over the months the Prime Minister has had, despite the support of Conservatives, to move major projects forward. These ethical failures of the Prime Minister and his government are already an opportunity to investigate a bit more how he views ethics and integrity. Internationally, there has been the beginning of a disaster. We have seen the government and the Prime Minister dispense with something as simple as the rule of law and basic human dignity when it comes to standing with the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel, instead siding with terror organizations and rewarding them with statehood. That is one of the highest failures of ethical standards and moral judgment.”
“This is a record of abuse that stretches into the tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars. Massive spending was required in the context of an international crisis, but so much of that money is completely unaccounted for. It is not exactly a record of trust. Now we have a Prime Minister who could cash in on nearly 100 conflicts of interest, according to statistics expert Duff Conacher of Democracy Watch, who appeared before committee. Ninety-nine per cent of the decisions the Prime Minister makes are not subject to conflict laws. The Prime Minister told Canadians that they needed to sacrifice while he financially benefits from offshore tax havens. This is not the kind of confidence that Canadians expect of their government.”
“They saw it in the SNC-Lavalin scandal, where the former prime minister abused his power and forayed into the integrity of public prosecutions to protect his friends and a company that has been revealed to be mired in scandal and corruption around the world, building prisons for dictators in Middle Eastern jurisdictions. We saw a prime minister who abused the idea of charitable work for our young people through the WE Charity scandal. That was supposed to be good in this country, but he engorged and enriched himself and his family through it. We saw a prime minister who stood by the arrive scam app, an app that was designed to try to keep Canadians safe, and who spent tens of millions in development on phony companies and phony front organizations. That is the just the tip of the iceberg.”
“We are talking about a country that the Prime Minister himself has defined as one in a huge crisis. Major decisions need to be made with blinding speed, but with that must come brilliant transparency to ensure that the Prime Minister and his government are not setting themselves up to be on the take later. This is not a different kind of government, a government worthy of trust. We are now into over 10 years of it, and historically the Liberal Party has not exactly been known as the model for public trust and public confidence with public finances. This speak to a pattern of Liberal corruption. (1720) Canadians have seen this Liberal movie many times before. They saw it with former prime minister Justin Trudeau, who violated four provisions of the Conflict of Interest Act by accepting a vacation on a private island, of all things.”
“Specific to this, the Prime Minister is a very impressive business person, and I say that comfortably in this chamber. He coled efforts to raise billions of dollars in capital. He is entitled to future carried interest payments based on the performance of the fund he set up. At his previous firm, he set up a massive fund and raised billions of dollars in which he has a personal stake, but the Canadian public has no idea what is actually in that fund. Members will understand the conflict issues that the opposition is raising in good faith with the government. The screen set up by the Ethics Commissioner does not require disclosure when the Prime Minister recuses himself when dealing with these types of issues. That is an intolerable loophole. It is an opportunity for a massive abuse of taxpayer money and massive abuse of the public trust.”
“The fact that it is even a question now was born specifically out of the Prime Minister 's commercial conduct in the past. When the Prime Minister set up his so-called blind trust, he knew exactly what went into it, so consider the likelihood that those assets have changed from the start of the trust to what it is now, seven months into his prime ministership and only a few months after he surrendered them to a blind trust. Members will remember that he has been reluctant, since being sworn in as Prime Minister after a general election campaign, to show transparency. There has been a reluctance from the very beginning. That does not build confidence and trust with the people of Canada at a time when people are very anxious about government abuse and waste in spending.”