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 5 of 8.
“Mr. Speaker, like several of our colleagues have already done, I would like to take this opportunity to mention that yesterday, one of my employees celebrated five years of service. I would like to thank India La Haye for her work and congratulate her on this recognition. Now let me return to the motion and the subject at hand. Ultimately, what we are discussing here is the Alto high-speed rail project. I have already said several times here, in response to certain colleagues from the Bloc Québécois during their speeches, that I too believe that what happened in 1969 is unacceptable and inexcusable. I have said it before and I will say it again, but it is no longer 1969. It is 2026.”
“Mr. Speaker, I fully support what my colleague is saying, even though that is not what we are talking about today. She has my full support and the support of all my colleagues here. Let us come back to today's topic, which is high-speed rail. Like my colleague, I, too, am an engineer and, as such, I can say that a project like this one is complex. It takes time to get everything in order. We are being accused of moving too quickly, but does my colleague think that completing the studies within four years is moving too quickly?”
“Mr. Speaker, I noted my dear colleague from Hull—Aylmer's enthusiasm for this project. Can you tell me whether, in your riding, the people of Hull—Aylmer are as interested and just as excited about this project as you are?”
“Mr. Speaker, once again, as I said to our colleague who spoke before, what happened in 1969 is obviously unacceptable and inexcusable. We will not do it again, and it will not happen. Now, with this high-speed rail project, we are still a long way from the final route. Consultations are currently under way to determine the route. Could my colleague tell us why it would be a problem to hold these pre-consultations before getting to the heart of the matter a little later?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank our colleague, the member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue, for his speech. I fully agree with him and his colleagues that what happened in Mirabel in 1969 is unacceptable, should not be repeated and will not be repeated. Now, I would like the member to give us his point of view, his opinion on the merits of a high-speed rail project such as Alto. We know that this is a linear project, 60 metres wide. Does the Bloc Québécois, and this member in particular, think it is appropriate to build high-speed rail in Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague, the member for Trois‑Rivières, hears when she is out and about in her riding. How are people responding when she talks about the Alto project, especially since one of the stations will be in Trois-Rivières? An hon. member: That is a very good question.”
“Mr. Speaker, since my colleague is a member of Parliament for a region neighbouring Mirabel and knows the area very well, could he tell us what he is hearing in his riding in terms of support for the Alto project in the Lower Laurentians?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition just said that the government and government policies are responsible for causing inflation in Canada. How does he account for the fact that inflation is 2.4% in Canada when Canada was one of the first G7 countries to get its inflation rate under control?”
“Mr. Speaker, I must say that I agree overall with what our colleague just said. Climate change has a very significant impact on the price of food. We have no intention of removing industrial carbon pricing. Could my colleague talk a bit about the connection, if there even is one, between industrial carbon pricing and food prices?”
“Mr. Speaker, yes, greenhouse fruit and vegetable production will be included in our bill, which we will be discussing this afternoon in committee. We are including measures in that bill to promote greenhouse cultivation, vertical farming and urban agriculture. I think all of that is very important. As for the research centres, I think there was some consolidation going on. The work will continue to be done, but perhaps at fewer physical locations. The important work that these research centres do will continue.”
“Mr. Speaker, obviously supply and demand is the name of the game. Indeed, competition is key in food processing and in food distribution. In any one industry, competition is key. There are many different ways we can stimulate competition. One of the things that I agree with the previous speaker on is that we have to find enough space for locally owned, smaller grocery stores to be able to operate. There are issues in competition that prevent smaller companies from opening stores. I think we can address that and we should address that.”
“Mr. Speaker, it might not surprise the House that I agree entirely with what my colleague is saying. When I visited Moisson Laval, the food bank in my riding, one of the things it is doing is not just distributing food to people in need but also creating groups or classes, for lack of a better word, to pass on information to the users of the food banks on how they could best maximize their meagre dollars and continue to provide food for their families, but in a more rational way. It is also doing that. Therefore, I think it is important to support local initiatives and smaller grocery stores, which, indeed, have a role to play. We have to find a way to give them enough space so that they can thrive as well.”
“Mr. Speaker, obviously, I agree entirely with what my colleague just mentioned. When we want to change a behaviour, when we want individuals or corporations to behave in a different way, we use policy tools. We use incentives. We use market-based incentives to achieve that goal. That is what we think should happen. Just like the consumer carbon tax had no impact on food prices, removing the industrial carbon tax would have zero impact on food prices, and it would remove a very useful tool that we have to reduce pollution.”
“Mr. Speaker, one of the problems that we have in Canada is that our food distribution industry is highly concentrated. There are a few suppliers, a few businesses that operate in that sector. These businesses are also large conglomerates that have other much more profitable activities. However, we have found that grocery stores' operating margins do not seem to be out of the ordinary compared to what has happened in the past. Of course, it is very useful and important to continue monitoring the situation to ensure that there are no unexplained price increases.”
“Mr. Speaker, there are many things I could talk about, but I do not have much time. I do note the reality of food banks. There is a very important one in my riding, Moisson Laval. During the Christmas holiday period, I visited them. I worked with them. They, with other food banks in the Montreal area, were among the first to suggest to us that we should find ways to increase the incomes of everyday families so they could afford food. To afford food, we need to have the income. We need income support. Conservatives, I think, to this day do not quite understand what income support is.”
“In closing, because I think I am getting close to that, to address the issues of affordability, we need to make sure citizens have sufficient income to afford essential goods, to afford food. This what the government is doing with our groceries and essentials benefit. It is rapidly and efficiently transferring additional funds, particularly to people at the low end of the income scale, so they can face what is admittedly a tough situation with very high food prices at this time. It is by improving incomes that we improve affordability.”
“The industrial carbon tax is not going to come down, and the industrial carbon tax does not contribute to high food prices. It has zero impact on food prices. Another thing our friends often mention, and it is in their motion, is fuel regulations. They say we should not have any fuel regulations; let us burn everything in the air, who cares? Let us bring back lead. Let us put lead back in gasoline. Why not? We need to have effective fuel regulations, fuel standards, for the benefit of ourselves, of our children, of our grandchildren. This does not lead to higher food prices. This business of food prices in Canada being driven by “hidden taxes”, well, no; those are indeed imaginary taxes because they have no impact on the retail food price.”
“Speaker, am I being sarcastic? Of course I am. Of course I am. It worked. Market-based mechanisms worked, and acid rain stopped being the problem it was. The industrial carbon tax is in the same vein of mechanisms. It will be with a robust industrial carbon tax that we will accelerate our transition to a less carbon-intensive economy. It does not mean we will all of a sudden stop producing oil, of course not, but our economy will become a lot less carbon-intensive. This will not happen by magic or any other way; it will happen if we have regulations and policies in place that provide the necessary incentives, market-based mechanisms, things that Conservatives, true Conservatives, really supported in the past and implemented in the past.”
“The Conservatives keep coming back with the industrial carbon tax. They say, “If we just eliminate the industrial carbon tax, my God, the world will be so much better. Everything will disappear, and this will be a wonderful world.” This surprises me a lot coming from Conservatives. I have grey hair, so I remember things that happened in the past. I do not understand why our friends do not appreciate, or have ceased to appreciate, market-based mechanisms to resolve problems. There were those raving lunatics, raving socialists, such as Brian Mulroney and Ronald Reagan, who came up with tough regulations and legislation to control acid rain, which was a huge problem. It was solved because those raving socialists, Mulroney and Reagan, did a bilateral agreement. (1055) An hon. member: He is being sarcastic. Carlos Leitão: Mr.”
“It was something like 0.8% in October, then it went down to about 0.1% or 0.2%, and I suspect in about a week or 10 days, when the next CPI report comes out, we will see that on a month-to-month basis, food prices continue to be moderate, even if, on a year-over-year basis, January will likely be even above 6%. It will probably be something like 7% or 8%, and the Conservatives will once again cry that this is terrible. I ask members to please look at the month-to-month evolution of food prices, and they will notice, if they are honest with themselves, that there is a marked slowdown in food prices. It is beginning to work. It is beginning to trickle down, and we are slowly but clearly bringing back food price growth to a more sustainable level. Let us get back to the motion of our colleagues. I still have some time, but not much.”
“There was a temporary three-month reduction in the GST on many products, including some prepared foods, meals in restaurants, etc. That made it so that food prices one year ago dropped sharply, so when we compare December 2024 to December 2025, we have this 6.2% increase. The Conservatives then say, “It is the highest increase in the G7. My God, it is one of the highest in the world. Look at what the Liberals have done.” They forgot to look at the recent monthly pattern in food price increases. If they had done that, they would have realized there has been a significant slowdown in food prices from month to month.”
“One of the solutions would be to open up and import more beef from overseas, but even overseas the quantities available are rather limited, so that is a major issue. Then, as beef prices increase, there is a cascading impact on many other types of protein available in supermarkets as people try to substitute other products for beef, so many other prices also go up. This is a major issue that affects food prices. Let us go back to those base effects. As for our friends on the other side, I congratulate their strategists because they chose the right time to come up with the 6.2%, which is a real number. It exists, but it is entirely misleading because it is a base effect. What happened one year ago, in December 2024?”
“Another very important factor in the rising food inflation seen in North America—in the United States and Canada—is the higher cost of meat. (1050) [ English ] Beef prices are very high in Canada and in the United States. It has nothing to do with government policy and everything to do with climate change. Crop failures, forest fires, droughts and all of that have made it so that cattle producers have had to sharply reduce the size of their herds. There is no meat available, which is why prices have gone through the roof. It is supply and demand. Supply has been hit by a sequence of of events, and demand has remained relatively stable; therefore, prices go up, and they have gone up very rapidly in Canada and the United States.”
“That is not the case. The Canadian governments public policy has nothing to do with the shortage of coffee on the market. I have never seen any coffee plantations in Saskatchewan. There are none. Canada does not produce coffee, so we have to import it. Global markets are facing a coffee shortage. I mentioned coffee because our Conservative friends always talk about coffee when they list all the items that have gone up by 30%, 40% or 50%. There is a global coffee shortage. On top of that, our American neighbours decided to put a tariff on Brazilian coffee because they dislike the Brazilian government. Just like that, Brazilian coffee is suddenly subject to a tariff. Much of the coffee we drink in Canada is produced in the United States, so we are feeling the impact of this U.S. tariff as well.”
“This relates to food inflation because it is particularly problematic when it comes to daily living expenses and essential household spending, including housing and food. Food inflation is very high in Canada, just as it is in all G7 countries. Let us talk about food inflation. What is driving it, what set it off and what fuels it? Generally, inflation stems from a mismatch between supply and demand. Food inflation in particular is driven by the mismatch between supply and demand. Since 2022‑23, it has been primarily due to supply issues. The pandemic and the period that followed caused major disruptions across supply chains. A series of shocks affected markets in developed countries and saw food inflation soar at an exceptionally high rate. It is not quite accurate to say that government policies caused these shocks.”
“Mr. Speaker, I apologize for leaving my phone on the desk. I was using it to keep an eye on the time, but I understand. I will also try to be more measured with my remarks because I see that it is causing some commotion. I was talking about deflation and saying that we do not want to trigger deflation. At the same time, we recognize that the cost of living is very high and that this is affecting different people differently. We are saying, and rightly so, that average wages have increased faster than inflation. That is true. However, average wages vary widely. Not everybody earns average wages. Those at the low end of the pay scale have not experienced these wage increases.”
“The Conservatives want to bring down the price level. The Conservatives want Canada to plunge into a deflationary cycle. The Conservatives want a massive economic depression. We do not want that. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Carlos Leitão: Precisely. This is getting a little out of hand, and—”
“As politicians, especially those of us who are economists, we have a duty to make sure our constituents understand that inflation and the cost of living are not quite the same thing. Inflation is the rate of increase in prices; the cost of living is the price level. The price level is affected by the cumulative impact of past inflation. Even though inflation is now back at 2%, the cumulative impact of the last four years has made it so that the price level is indeed very high. Now our friends are proposing that we bring the price level down. Is the Conservative Party really sure it wants to have a price level drop in Canada? Do members know what that is called? It is called “deflation”. Deflation usually only happens if there is a massive economic depression. Is that what Conservatives want? Bravo, if that is what they want.”
“They picked this moment to talk about food inflation, which is at 6%. Technically, in December, they were correct, as food inflation in Canada was 6.2%. Of course, Conservatives forgot to mention that it was entirely the result of base effects. I will come back to base effects, because it is important to understand what those are. I know the Conservatives understand them, because they picked the right moment to quote 6%. I wonder what Conservatives will say, for example, in the month of March, when those base effects will have disappeared and, most likely, food inflation will be at about 2%. Then we will not hear a word from them about food inflation. However, I will come back to the base effects. Having said that inflation is back inside the normal range, it is true that the cost of living is high.”
“Canada was actually the country where inflation got back to a more normal level ahead of all the other G7 countries. In fact, much to the distress of our Conservative friends, the Bank of Canada did a very good job. We know the Conservatives wanted to fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. Actually, the central bank in Canada brought inflation back down to the 2% range, way ahead of everybody else, and inflation in Canada has been at around 2% now for well over one year. While the Conservatives like to make comparisons to inflation in the United States, and to how good things are in the U.S., it is not yet back within that range there. Another aspect that disturbs me a little when we hear about inflation from our Conservative friends is that they pick and choose the numbers they want to quote.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is my turn to say a few words on this issue. I will try to stick to four topics, and I count on your assistance to keep me on track. It will not surprise anyone if I say that I do not agree with the motion of the opposition, because it is way off base. Let us talk about one of the four points I want to talk about. Let us talk about inflation, because that is a theme that keeps coming back among the Conservatives. It is “inflation this” and “inflation that”. “Inflation is out of control, and it is all the fault of the government. The inflationary policies of the Liberals caused inflation to get out of the bag.” Inflation got out of the bag after COVID. It hit all developed countries at about the same time and at about the same pace.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank our colleague for the good work she does and for her excellent question. The Government of Canada is focused on building a stronger economy to make life more affordable for Canadians. The new grocery and essentials benefit will provide up to $805 in additional support, on top of the GST rebate, which will go directly into the pockets of Canadian families. In addition, our government is addressing the root causes of food insecurity by developing a national food security strategy that will improve access to affordable food. We remain—”
“Mr. Speaker, after a few weeks away in our ridings and after a break from the parliamentary session, we are back in the House of Commons ready for a new year of work. I wish all my colleagues in the House a happy new year. In 2025, we delivered concrete results: a more resilient economy, strategic investments to strengthen our industries and clear measures to protect Canada's interests. We made a choice to act. We are strengthening our economic sovereignty and supporting innovation here at home. As this session resumes, the message is simple: We will carry on. We will carry on investing, we will carry on protecting our country, and we will carry on building Canada strong.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is clear from what is happening at the Standing Committee on Finance that the opposition parties do not want to study the budget or the budget implementation bill. That is unfortunate, because Canadians are counting on us here in the House to get things right. This budget contains major measures that will shape our economic future, such as the clean electricity investment tax credit. It also advances Canada's consumer-driven banking framework and promotes real competition in our financial sector. Even if the opposition parties prefer to avoid committing to the budget, we will continue to fulfill our responsibilities and deliver the results that Canadians expect and deserve.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech, which included several points on which we agree. I would like him to comment on the second section of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which relates to fundamental freedoms. What does the Bloc Québécois understand these fundamental freedoms to mean?”
“Mr. Chair, there are many issues that we share. If we discussed things, we could possibly get to some understanding. I do not agree, obviously, with everything that was said, but I do thank my colleague for mentioning that, for example, the tariffs on steel and aluminum are one of the largest contributors to the recent increase in the cost of production of automobiles in the United States and Canada. I also would caution all colleagues here that the Stellantis story is not finished yet, so let us not jump to conclusions right away. There is more to come on that. With respect to the issue of diversifying trade, clearly we need to do that. How do we accomplish that? How do we accomplish diversifying trade in the auto industry when, as we all know, exporting Canadian vehicles to other continents is somewhat complicated?”
“Mr. Chair, there are several things. Perhaps we should start with the fact that 90% of automobiles made in Canada are sold in the United States. Therefore, the key to this whole thing is to continue to have access to the U.S. market. There are other issues, but the fundamental issue is access to the United States market. That access is threatened by U.S. tariffs and the U.S. desire to block the entry of Canadian vehicles into the U.S. Does the hon. member believe that, just by caving in to U.S. demands and signing any deal, it will solve the problem?”
“Mr. Chair, I have one simple question for my colleague. On the fact that the auto industry is severely affected by those unjustifiable U.S. tariffs, what is the Conservative plan? I still cannot visualize how the industrial carbon tax will address the issue of U.S. tariffs.”
“Mr. Chair, as I said earlier, there are five automobile assembly operations in Canada and hundreds of parts manufacturers. We are in constant contact with the industry. We know where they stand. We know what they require. Yes, we are engaging in that process of revising and reviewing CUSMA. It is very important. We will not negotiate in public, and we will not cave in. We will not panic, and we will not cave in.”
“Mr. Chair, the Government of Canada and the Government of Ontario have been working with the automotive industry for decades. My colleagues from Ontario have mentioned that. We have been working with this industry for decades. We are quite surprised. [ English ] We will not forget the companies that are now turning their backs on Canada and fleeing to the United States. We will not forget that. We will not forget the other companies that are remaining here, maintaining their production facilities here and continuing to contribute to the Canadian economy. We will remember that.”
“Mr. Chair, that is indeed a very important question. I would say that there are two parallel components to the government's strategy, and both are important. On the one hand, we need to support the industry, which is affected by these tariffs. It needs liquidity and emergency support. We are doing this with the programs available at the Department of Industry. At the same time, we also need to continue to think more strategically about diversifying markets. Above all, we must always think about the industry of the future. I know our friends across the aisle do not like electric vehicles very much, but electric vehicles are part of the future. Going forward, this Canadian industry will also have to be at the forefront of electric vehicle production.”
“Our American friends need to understand that this industry is highly integrated and that any attempt to split it up will cause the industry to collapse, which will not be to anyone's advantage.”
“While not currently in force, the threatened tariff on auto parts remains. It is the uncertainty that is causing the biggest headaches for the industry. More recently, imports of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles were also targeted by an inexplicable 25% tariff. Given that over 90% of vehicles manufactured in Canada are destined for the U.S. market and 40% of vehicles sold in Canada are assembled in the U.S., the impact of these tariffs is monumental. Our government recognizes these significant challenges, and we will work closely with the industry, but I want to be clear: We will not sign just any agreement at any price. The agreement that will eventually be signed must benefit the industry.”
“The auto industry is one of Canada's largest manufacturing sectors, and it is facing unfair, unjustified and inexplicable U.S. tariffs that are increasing production costs and threatening good jobs in this highly integrated market on both sides of the border. Since the signing of the auto pact in 1965, this industry has become increasingly integrated. However, on April 3, 2025, the United States completely changed course and imposed a 25% tariff on all Canadian vehicles that do not comply with the rules of origin under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, or CUSMA. The U.S. also imposed a 25% tariff on the value of non-U.S. components in CUSMA-eligible vehicles. Additionally, on May 3, 2025, the United States imposed a 25% tariff on non-CUSMA-compliant auto parts.”
“Mr. Chair, the automotive industry is a key sector of the Canadian economy and, as several of my colleagues have already mentioned, it generates billions of dollars in economic activity. It accounts for 8% of Canada's manufacturing GDP. It is important to note that the sector includes five world-class automakers that are supported by a network of 700 parts suppliers. Automotive companies directly employ more than 125,000 Canadians, primarily in Ontario, and support hundreds of thousands of additional jobs across the country. Our automotive plants are internationally renowned for their high quality, thanks in large part to Canada's exceptional workforce. The Honda plant in Alliston and the Toyota plant in Cambridge both won the J.D Power Gold Plant Quality Award in 2024. On top of that, Toyota Canada won 22 awards between 1991 and 2024.”
“Mr. Chair, I think we all agree that the Canadian automobile industry is undergoing a serious crisis. I would just like to know from our colleagues across the aisle if they could tell us the source of that crisis. Is it the U.S. tariffs, which are unjust and unjustifiable, or is it the EV mandates?”
“Mr. Chair, I would like to ask my colleague a very simple question. Does she think that Canada should sign any agreement with the Americans at any cost just for the sake of having an agreement? Would it not be better to negotiate an agreement that benefits all Canadians, while taking the necessary time to come up with something that makes sense, rather than rushing headlong into an agreement that makes no sense?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to say that it depends on many factors. The situation is not uniform across the country. As I said at the beginning of my speech, back home in Laval, it is quite the opposite. The new homes currently being built are affordable for middle-class families.”
“I fail to understand how, at this point in human history, we can consider cutting international aid to less fortunate countries. This is really not the time for that. I see that my time is almost up. I have a lot more to say, but I think I will continue at the next opportunity.”
“While that may not be the case 10 years from now, at the moment, the impact of the industrial carbon tax on food prices is virtually zero. It really is a matter of supply and demand. It truly is an international issue. In fact, the situation points to a need for more collaboration and international co-operation. My Conservative colleagues also talk a lot about massive cuts to Canada's international aid. They believe that Canada should drastically slash its international development assistance. Right now would be the worst time to do that. If we think that we have food problems, in a rich country like Canada, imagine what it is like for countries with fewer resources than us that rely on international aid to feed their people.”