Carlos Leitão
Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, Quebec · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, this government's record is that it has created a very resilient economy. Despite headwinds from the south, our economy continues to grow. In fact, last week I encouraged my opposition colleagues to check out the C.D. Howe Institute's Business Cycle Council. I would again encourage them to do so. They should read its report.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are going to keep going. Canadians know that, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, 5,000 small businesses closed their doors. Canadians know that the Canadian economy is under pressure from the United States. No, that is not an excuse. I heard my colleagues say that the international context is an excuse.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that in May, we created 88,000 jobs. Canadians know that in May, there were 154,000 full-time jobs. Canadians know that 27,000 of these jobs were in the construction sector. Canadians know that the trade surplus grew in April and May.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time. It is my turn to speak to Bill C-30 , which seeks to implement the economic update. I want to address several issues, but, first, I want to talk about why we are doing things a bit differently here today.”
“It concerns the April 28 economic update, which contains a number of very useful and very important measures for our economy. I suspect I may run out of time, but before I talk about those measures, I want to address a few problems that have been mentioned today in the conversations and in the debates that we have had here so far.”
“(1900) We are making this commitment because the world is a different place now. Today, our situation is very delicate. Our biggest trade and economic partner is also our neighbour: the United States. It is a partner that has very plainly and clearly told us that it does not need what Canada has to offer.”
The complete record
Every one of 374 lines we hold for Carlos Leitão, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 8.
“Mr. Speaker, this government's record is that it has created a very resilient economy. Despite headwinds from the south, our economy continues to grow. In fact, last week I encouraged my opposition colleagues to check out the C.D. Howe Institute's Business Cycle Council. I would again encourage them to do so. They should read its report. They might find it very enlightening, and it might change the Conservatives' message, which is out of sync with reality.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are going to keep going. Canadians know that, under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, 5,000 small businesses closed their doors. Canadians know that the Canadian economy is under pressure from the United States. No, that is not an excuse. I heard my colleagues say that the international context is an excuse. Come on, how could that be an excuse? It is very real, very tangible. There is a trade war being waged by a partner that used to be trustworthy but is not anymore. We in the government are helping businesses get back on track, and we are going to succeed.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that in May, we created 88,000 jobs. Canadians know that in May, there were 154,000 full-time jobs. Canadians know that 27,000 of these jobs were in the construction sector. Canadians know that the trade surplus grew in April and May. Canadians know that, just yesterday, the Prime Minister announced 13 contracts worth $5 billion. Canadians know this—”
“Mr. Speaker, this will be a very brief response. Yes, we are working on two parallel tracks, including emergency support for businesses and workers through a variety of programs. We continue to develop new models of emergency assistance, but there is also more fundamental and structural support aimed at transforming the Canadian economy.”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague is correct. They were subamendments. Every time the Conservative Party proposed a subamendment, the subamendment was always worded in English only, so we had to wait for it to be translated. That was one of the factors that caused the delay in our proceedings. Whenever we asked if we could set that aside and keep working while the translation was being done, we were denied.”
“Mr. Speaker, culture and supply management are issues on which we will not compromise. That is important. We have said it before, we stand by it and that will not change. However, it must also be noted that we have said from the start that a bad deal would be far worse than signing just anything. So far, we have not signed anything precisely because what was presented to us was unacceptable. No, we have not caved. On the contrary, we are standing our ground.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is clear that our borrowing capacity is not unlimited. Of course there are limits. However, in Canada, we are still a long way from that limit. Canada continues to have very easy access to financial markets. We have a AAA credit rating. The interest rate on 10-year government bonds is much lower than in the United States. The financial markets have confidence in Canada, and we will remain committed to diversifying the economy.”
“How is it that long-term bond yields, for example 10-year yields, are around 3.5%? That is roughly 100 basis points, or one percentage point, lower than in the United States. If we are as broke as our colleagues opposite claim, why are interest rates on the financial markets still so favourable in Canada? We are on the right track. We are going to diversify our economy and continue to sign trade agreements.”
“That work continues, despite the obstacles the administration sometimes puts in our way. We remain focused on that, but we need to have a broader perspective on all of this. It is important to point out one other thing that is very clear in the economic update. Our colleagues opposite keep saying that we are running huge deficits, that we are heading straight for a wall and that things are not working. Our colleagues sometimes paint a rather apocalyptic picture. Let us review some basic facts. Our deficit stands at 2.1% of GDP, which is entirely manageable. Canada's public debt is equally manageable. In fact, that is why our AAA credit rating is being maintained. If Canada were truly a country on the brink of ruin, how could we still have a AAA credit rating? I will conclude on this point.”
“It is also why we are going to keep strengthening ties with reliable, dependable and predictable partners. That said, it is also clear that 70% of our exports go to the United States. Our neighbour will always be our neighbour. We cannot change geography. We still have good relationships with American businesses and the American people. We are going to maintain those relationships. We have also committed to doubling our non-U.S. exports. Let us look at the reasoning behind that. Even if we can double the 30% of our exports going to non-U.S. countries, and I think we will get there, 40% to 50% of our exports will still be going to the United States. It will still be important to maintain our trade relationship with the United States. That is why we are still committed to updating CUSMA.”
“(1900) We are making this commitment because the world is a different place now. Today, our situation is very delicate. Our biggest trade and economic partner is also our neighbour: the United States. It is a partner that has very plainly and clearly told us that it does not need what Canada has to offer. We could discuss that at great length. It does not need anything except our energy, our aluminum and other resources. The Americans imposed a number of sector-based tariffs, which is not entirely consistent with CUSMA requirements, but they did it anyway to put the Canadian government under a lot of pressure. They really want to put a lot of pressure on the economy to force us into making all sorts of concessions, to the point where our own sovereignty is at risk. That is why we are investing heavily in defence.”
“It concerns the April 28 economic update, which contains a number of very useful and very important measures for our economy. I suspect I may run out of time, but before I talk about those measures, I want to address a few problems that have been mentioned today in the conversations and in the debates that we have had here so far. For example, as of the end of the fiscal year, March 31, Canada had met the target of 2% of GDP for spending and investments in national defence. That was confirmed by NATO itself, and it is something that Canada had not done in a very long time. Liberal and Conservative governments kept national defence spending at 1% or 1.5% of GDP. We very quickly and practically reached the 2% target, and we committed to allocating 5% of GDP to national defence by 2035. That is a very significant commitment.”
“This filibuster was clearly deliberate, especially given how much of the committee's time was spent on a single clause and on an amendment moved by the Conservatives themselves. They then moved subamendment after subamendment. They used a very clear tactic: These subamendments were drafted in English only. We had to wait for them to be translated before work could resume. We can see the mechanism at play. Also, the Conservatives' discussions on these subamendments involved a lot of repetition and many digressions that had very little to do with the matter at hand. That also contributed to delays. In any event, we spent hours and hours on it. It quickly became clear that no progress was going to be made at all. That is a big problem because Bill C-30 is so important.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time. It is my turn to speak to Bill C-30 , which seeks to implement the economic update. I want to address several issues, but, first, I want to talk about why we are doing things a bit differently here today. Last week, at the Standing Committee on Finance, on which I serve, the Conservative members used some pretty intense filibustering tactics during the study of C-30 . What I found especially shocking was that the Conservatives themselves admitted that this filibustering had nothing to do with any specific concerns about this bill but everything to do with winning concessions on another bill, Bill C-22 . They said so themselves. They made it very clear. To get concessions on Bill C-22, they were prepared to filibuster, change everything and take as long as necessary to achieve that goal.”
“Mr. Speaker, there is a whole jumble of things in there. Anyway, let us focus on what I think is the main thing: the statistics. Let us look at the statistics. What the statistics also say is that Canada's economy created 88,000 jobs in May, including 150,000 full-time jobs. Most of these new jobs were in construction. I am assuming that if people are being hired to work in construction, the purpose is to build something. There are indeed 27,000 new jobs in construction. That is where we are headed.”
“Mr. Speaker, once again, I suggest that our colleagues in the Conservative Party consult the C.D. Howe Institute's Business Cycle Council over the weekend to gain a proper understanding of what is currently happening in the Canadian economy. Beyond that, I would also like to mention to the House that short-term and long-term interest rates in Canada are stable. What does that mean? It indicates that the financial markets have full confidence in the Canadian economy and full confidence in how the Government of Canada is managing the Canadian economy.”
“Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we have been doing for the past year: changing course. We recognize that we are in a very complicated situation because of the tariff war and the global economic situation. That is why we have introduced policies to help diversify our economy. Now, I also want to tell my colleague that, over the weekend, perhaps he could consult the C.D. Howe Institute's Business Cycle Council to get a real definition of what is going on right now.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague as well for her excellent speech and her commitment to Canada. Could she elaborate on what she just mentioned, about the work that she is doing with the government on behalf of her community to ensure that her riding also fully participates in the Canadian economy?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for the excellent speech she made and also for underlining her commitment to this country and to progress. I thank her for that and welcome her, again, to the group. I have a question about the economic update and Bill C‑30 . Could my colleague speak to the fact that the government continues to intervene to protect industries that are at risk from the U.S. trade war, and could she speak to the measures we continue to put in place to support industries at risk?”
“Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her excellent speech and her overview of the history, origins and evolution of racism in North America. We have to talk about racism in order to combat it. I would like to hear her thoughts on the systemic nature of racism, even today, in 2026.”
“Mr. Speaker, today we are celebrating Portugal Day, the day of Camões and Portuguese communities. For me, this day holds a very special significance. Like thousands of Portuguese before me, I left my country of birth in search of new opportunities. Canada welcomed me and allowed me to build a career, a family and a life, for which I am deeply grateful. Today, Canadians of Portuguese descent contribute to the prosperity of our communities. They are entrepreneurs, workers, teachers and artists. I wish everyone celebrating this day in Canada, in Portugal and around the world a very happy Portugal Day. Long live Canada. Viva Portugal .”
“Mr. Speaker, Canada is a space-faring nation. We have contributed valuable technologies, research, scientists and engineers, and we are a global leader in the field of space exploration. We can now add another achievement to our list of accomplishments. The first Canadian to orbit the moon, Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen, is in Ottawa today following the success of the Artemis II mission. This mission has inspired Canadians and stands as a symbol of hope for our continued exploration of the final frontier. We commend Mr. Hansen's contribution and, on behalf of all Canadians across the country, thank him for his service.”
“Mr. Speaker, the government remains in constant communication with businesses and workers in the steel and aluminum industries. On April 29, the Prime Minister 's new Advisory Committee on Canada-U.S. Economic Relations held its first meeting. This forum will help us better understand the impact of the situation and strengthen our ability to respond to future developments. While quick responses remain important in the short term, our government will continue to work with industry to develop long-term strategies that build resilience, support workers and position Canadian businesses to succeed in an ever-changing and competitive North American market. We will always protect Canadian interests and promote stable, predictable and fair international trade.”
“Above all, we will continue to support Canadian workers and businesses affected by the instability caused by the arbitrary and unfair tariffs imposed by the U.S. government.”
“To further facilitate this transition, notably through the $5-billion strategic response fund, we are supporting companies that are shifting their production to Canadian supply chains. This program will provide Canadian steel and aluminum companies with the support they need to manufacture products that are in demand in the domestic market but are not yet produced here. Furthermore, in a trade environment marked by growing protectionism, the ongoing need for investment in defence equipment manufacturing and critical infrastructure is helping Canadian companies shift their production to meet domestic needs. Our government remains focused on stimulating domestic demand so that Canadian businesses and workers in the steel and aluminum sectors can maintain and expand their operations.”
“The government's buy Canadian policy stimulates our economy while supporting local businesses and workers. By gearing government contracts to Canadian businesses, we keep investments in our country, support small and medium-sized businesses and strengthen supply chain resilience. This approach helps create good-paying jobs, encourages local production and reduces dependence on unstable global markets. It also ensures that taxpayer dollars provide communities with maximum benefits, while fostering sustainable and reliable production. It is worth noting that this approach does not mean we are closing our borders. Rather, it means we are building a stronger, more independent economy that puts Canada on the road to long-term prosperity and shared growth.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond to comments by the hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona regarding the buy Canadian policy and the use of Canadian materials in public projects. We have taken decisive and unprecedented action to help Canadian steel and aluminum producers secure a larger share of the Canadian market. With that in mind, one key element of our response to U.S. tariffs is to ensure that, moving forward, we become our own best customer. We are therefore prioritizing Canadian steel and aluminum in government procurement contracts through our buy Canadian policy. This policy ensures that federal spending prioritizes Canadian suppliers. For example, Canadian steel and aluminum will be used in future infrastructure projects, including ports, bridges and energy projects.”
“Madam Speaker, we could have said a lot of things, but we are short on time. I will just say two things. First, when we break down GDP, we should note that one of the sources of weakness in the first quarter was government spending. We know this is temporary. It is an adjustment, and it will change. However, I agree with my colleague that one of the main issues is exports. Indeed, exports to the United States are a significant problem, and it will need to be addressed over time. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about private investment, especially in a climate of uncertainty. After all, the decline in exports and the trade war are also creating a great deal of uncertainty. Another trend we are seeing is a freeze on private investment, particularly in machinery, equipment, and so on.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the fine member for Terrebonne, for that very good question. Our aluminum processing companies across Canada, and particularly in Quebec, are facing difficulties related to the tariffs imposed by the United States. Our aluminum processors are the backbone of the Quebec and Canadian economy, representing more than 30,000 jobs and more than $11 billion in sales. That is why we have already allocated more than $20 million to Quebec aluminum processors as part of our regional tariff response initiative, with an overall budget of $500 million. Our government is taking concrete action and we will always be there to help our—”
“Mr. Speaker, I will say it again: Canada is not in a recession. Statistics Canada has never said that we are in a recession. The financial markets will determine that. There is no cause for alarm. However, our economy is under threat. Our economy is directly affected by the tariffs. We are the only G7 country that borders the United States, and we are heavily dependent on trade with the United States. That is our problem, and we have a plan to address it.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am very surprised. (1145) [ English ] Some hon. members: Oh, oh! I believe this is straight harassment from that side. It is trying to shut me up. You cannot do that. We are supposed to be able to— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“Mr. Speaker, let us be clear: Canada is not in a recession. I could tell the member that, per capita, the GDP rose in the first quarter, but I am not going to say that. I could have also told him that the financial markets have completely ignored this message and that they are not in turmoil over it. What I can say, however, is that the Canadian economy is suffering directly from the impact of the trade war and is suffering directly from the impact of the war in the Middle East. Fuel prices are very high. Investment is down, due to uncertainty. That is the problem, but we have a plan.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the 65th anniversary of 710 Ste-Rose Squadron, a remarkable institution in our community that has been inspiring and training generations of young people for 65 years. Through its commitment to leadership, discipline, service, and excellence, 710 Ste-Rose Squadron plays a vital role in the development of our youth, instilling in them values that will stay with them for life. I would like to pay tribute to the cadets, instructors, volunteers, families, and everyone who has contributed over the decades to the success and reputation of this vital squadron. On behalf of the people of Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, I congratulate 710 Ste-Rose Squadron on its 65th anniversary and wish it a long and successful future.”
“Mr. Chair, the economic update includes many measures, but I would like to focus on one in particular and ask the minister if he can comment on it. Unfortunately, we do not have much time. I am thinking in particular of the investment fund, the Canada Strong fund, which I think is an excellent idea. Could the minister comment on that?”
“Mr. Chair, the International Monetary Fund released its annual report a short time ago, which includes very encouraging remarks about Canada and the Canadian economy, despite the cloud of uncertainty hanging over the global economy. The IMF had some really positive things to say about us. When the minister is abroad, speaking with his counterparts and with investors looking to invest here, what advantage does he get out of the fact that the IMF has such high praise for Canada?”
“Mr. Chair, I have some questions for our excellent Minister of Finance . I am sorry about where I am sitting because we will have to turn. I did not choose my seating arrangement strategically. [ Translation ] Perhaps the Minister of Finance could talk to us a little about what it really means to have a AAA credit rating. When he travels and meets with colleagues from other G7 countries, what does it mean to him that Canada has a AAA credit rating? What is the benefit of that for all Canadians?”
“Moe in Saskatchewan, all Conservative premiers, they have realized the world has changed and Canada has to adjust to this new world order. Then, as if that was not enough, we have the war in the Middle East, which has led to a doubling of oil prices. That is a very different context that requires serious measures, which is what was done—”
“Therefore, we have this weird world of 50% tariffs on aluminum from Canada in the name of the national security of the United States. The U.S. actually needs Canadian aluminum. We have a very complex world. The tariff war is real. The tariff war is something we did not ask for. The tariff war is what is leading to profound adjustments in our manufacturing sector and in our economy as a whole. As our Prime Minister has repeated over and over again, this is not just a simple adjustment. This is a rupture in the world as we knew it, and the world now is different. The world has changed. That is something provincial premiers have fully realized. Whether it is Mr. Ford in Ontario, Ms. Smith in Alberta or Mr.”
“It was a result of the sharp rebound with broken supply chains, compounded by the war in Ukraine. The war in Ukraine led to, among other things, a very sharp increase in the prices of oil and other products, like grains. The global economy was already unbalanced in 2022-23. It was a very different environment than what we had before. New solutions and new proposals had to be put in place because the times were very different. As if that was not sufficient, then what did we have in 2024-25? A new administration in the United States decided to trigger a trade war. The world as we knew it is no longer the same. The United States, our trusted ally, no longer wants to buy things from Canada, because it claims it does not need anything from Canada. It does, but that is what it claims.”
“To prevent a massive depression, because that was what was going to happen if nothing was done, governments in the OECD area spent massively to support their economies. The Conservatives will say we wasted all that money. If governments had not done that, then the OECD economies and the global economy would have slipped into a major depression. That was a big shock in 2020. It was then followed by an economic rebound, a very sharp rebound, that took place in late 2021 into 2022, and it was a rebound in the context of broken supply chains. The result of that was massive upward pressure on prices. Inflation took off in the OECD area. It was not a “Liberal deficit”. Were the Liberals also responsible for the U.S. deficit, the German deficit and the French deficit? Let us be serious.”
“It is important to talk about the economic context because context is everything. Our colleagues from the opposition keep on saying that “2014 was this, 2014 was that, and 10 years later, blah blah blah.” The context is very important. We could go all the way back to 2007-08 and the financial crisis. I will not go that far, but I think we could because the world economy did go through a severe shock in 2007-08. The adjustment that took place afterwards took some time and left some scars globally. What has happened since 2020? We had the pandemic. The economy shut down. Governments in the OECD area shut down their economies because no one knew what was going to happen. Everything was stopped.”
“How can a country with a AAA rating have a broken economy? It does not. It does not make sense. We have a AAA rating because our fiscal house is in order and because our economy is growing despite the severe headwinds and shocks. By the way, I remind all members of the House and all those listening to us with great enthusiasm that this Friday, the GDP numbers are coming out for the first quarter. I do not know what those numbers will be, but I am pretty certain that Q1 GDP growth will be fairly strong. (2015) We hear this business that Canada has the fastest-shrinking economy in the G7. No. In fact, we have one of the fastest-growing economies in the G7 despite the shocks and the very uncertain context in which we are operating. I would like to take some time to talk about that context.”
“Not only is the economy of Canada a resilient economy that has been able to withstand severe shocks, but it grew at a reasonable pace when compared with our neighbours and peer countries. The economy of Canada is not broken. We are in fact leading the way among the G7 countries, which is recognized by our peers. That brings me to the next point I want to make, which is that this proves that Canada really has considerable fiscal strength. Our fiscal house is in order. We have a deficit of 2.1% of GDP, which, when we compare it to peer countries, is perfectly manageable. That deficit is projected to go to 1.4% of GDP by 2030, so the deficit is on a downward track. The debt-to-GDP ratio is at about 41% and will remain around that level in the fiscal framework into 2030 as well, which gives Canada a AAA rating.”
“To start with, the economic update tells us that the deficit for 2025‑26 in fact turned out to be about $66.9 billion rather than the $78.3 billion that had been forecast back in the November budget, so there was an improvement of about $11 billion in the public accounts of the government, of the country. Why was the deficit less than expected? It has nothing to do with the high price of oil. Conservatives talk about the GST on oil and say that it causes oil prices to go up and that is where the government makes its money, etc. No, the deficit was $11 billion less than what had been anticipated earlier because the economy in 2025 was much stronger than what had been expected. Government revenues were higher, and government spending was lower. That is where that $11 billion comes from.”
“Mr. Chair, it is my turn to talk about Bill C-30 and to talk about the economic context in which our economic update was presented recently and, especially, the Canadian economy. What we have witnessed in the last year at least, since I have been here, is that our colleagues from the official opposition have developed this skill of offering really simplistic solutions to what are highly complex and serious problems. In that context, let us talk about the economic update. It was an economic update, not a budget, but of course, there were some fiscal measures that were also announced in the budget. What does the economic update tell us?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am not even going to go to the money-printing side because that could take a few minutes. That is a whole different discussion. For example, I would never say I would fire the governor of the central bank. As a country, we do not say those things. The very specific question I have is this. In 2014, yes, the crude oil price started the year at $100 a barrel, but it finished at $55 a barrel. There was that sharp decline in oil prices throughout the year that explains the lower gasoline prices. Is the Leader of the Opposition aware of that?”
“Mr. Speaker, I think I can safely say that, no, we will not vote for the Conservative motion. In fact, the motion would make things far worse. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Carlos Leitão: Yes, it would. Yes, it would. Let me just say this, Mr. Speaker, if I may. Our current suspension of the federal excise tax for four months, at 10¢ a litre, will cost $2.4 billion. How much would the Conservative motion cost? How would they fund it?”
“Mr. Speaker, talking about seniors, that is exactly what I would like to ask my colleague about, because we do have in Canada the program of old age security and the guaranteed income supplement. Together we are talking about something like $85 billion. Does my colleague think that the new, right Conservatives would probably put an axe to those programs?”
“Mr. Speaker, I understand the situation very well. In my riding also, folks talk to us all the time about the high prices of gasoline and about the high cost of living. Everybody is worried about that. Also, folks do understand that the current high prices of gasoline come from the very sudden increase in crude oil prices, which is totally out of the government's control. By the way, oil is a global commodity, so global oil prices affect everybody, including the United States. Does my colleague not think that an across-the-board reduction in gasoline taxes would benefit folks at the higher end of the income scale more than people—”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his speech, and I thank him for reiterating that the Bloc Québécois will be voting against this motion. We are on the same page, which is great. I would also like to thank my colleague for pointing out that, lately, our Conservative friends have often referred to the price of gas in 2014. However, what the Conservative members are saying is factually incorrect. I want to thank my colleague for pointing that out as well. Now I have a question about the groceries and essentials benefit. Does my colleague not think that this is a well‑targeted benefit? We did not simply change the name of the transfer. We are using the GST credit criteria to target those most in need.”