Jacob Mantle
York—Durham, Ontario · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I am rising to follow up on a question I asked the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food about the troubling implications for family farms and the ability to pass family farms on to the next generation.”
“He wanted to pass his farm on to a nephew but could not do so because of the dramatic tax implications. The problem will only compound in the future because right now the average Canadian farmer is in their mid-fifties, and fewer than one in 12 has a successor under the age of 40. This is data from Statistics Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing what the government proposes in the fall. In the last minute I have, I would like to comment on the Speaker's ruling from yesterday. I appreciated the Speaker's ruling but I was deeply disappointed by it.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am rising today to present a petition on behalf of residents in my riding of York—Durham, particularly those from the town of Georgina and the community of Keswick on the south shore of Lake Simcoe, with respect to a new invasive species called water soldier.”
“The response at the time was an acknowledgement of the problem and a commitment to speak with the Minister of Finance and to come back to the House to inform us.”
“Therefore, residents in my riding are calling on the government to list or otherwise identify water soldier as an invasive aquatic plant under relevant federal law; to nominate a single federal department or agency to take responsibility for the federal government's response to water soldier; and then, to allocate sufficient financial and…”
The complete record
Every one of 466 lines we hold for Jacob Mantle, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 10.
“CETA has stronger pharmaceutical IP protections. CETA has stronger and more enforceable labour protections. By most, if not all, important measures, CETA is a better deal for Canada than the TPP. Even if we had held on to the terms of the European trade agreement, we would have been better off. However, unfortunately, the government walked away from that better deal, and now, we are left with this. As I said, this is part of a broader pattern of an unimaginative trade policy from the government. (1320) The Prime Minister , just yesterday, attempted to rhyme off his so-called accomplishments with respect to trade, but it was quite a pitiful list, if I may say.”
“My colleagues across the way, the Liberals, have described this as some sort of expanded agreement. This is not an expanded agreement. This is actually a worse agreement than we had, or will have, under CETA, or the European union agreement, where we previously had trade with the United Kingdom. This is worse than if we had just come to an agreement to maintain that access. CETA is more liberalizing than the TPP. CETA is deeper in terms of tariff elimination, deeper in terms of services and investment liberalization, and deeper when it comes to regulatory co-operation. CETA has better and faster tariff elimination. CETA has more quota for many of our agricultural products. CETA has dedicated provisions to respect veterinary, sanitary and phytosanitary issues. CETA has broader coverage for subnational government procurement.”
“This was an opportunity, truly a once in a generation opportunity, to redefine our trade with the United Kingdom. It is not every day that one of the largest economies in the world sets out to actively and positively rearrange its trading relationships, but the U.K. was doing that. Canada knew this. Everyone knew this. In fact, the United Kingdom has been on a tear, negotiating new trade agreements around the world, but we missed that opportunity, and now, we are paying the price. The counterfactual here is that we would have had a more dynamic trading relationship with the United Kingdom. This would be great today. We could have had a brand new bilateral deal with the United Kingdom for years. In this current environment, where we need more friends and more trade, that would have been a benefit to Canada.”
“colleague the member for Wellington—Halton Hills North just mentioned, rather than seeking an ambitious new deal with the United Kingdom, which is an important and critical trading partner for Canada, Canada walked away from negotiations with the United Kingdom. Under the trade continuity agreement, we had extended the United Kingdom similar access to what it had when it was a member of the European Union. Of course, it was not a surprise to anyone that it left. Brexit was not a surprise. It left, and we negotiated what was called the TCA. We had that for some time, and we still have it now. We will have to decide what to do with that. The TCA was in place to give the government time to move on to negotiate toward a more complete bilateral agreement with the United Kingdom, but the government walked away from that.”
“Instead, we should be thanking the United Kingdom because it really is the United Kingdom and its hard work in negotiating an entrance into the Trans-Pacific Partnership that got us here. Unfortunately, very little can be said about Canada's involvement in the U.K.'s ascension in joining this regional trading agreement. In my view, the U.K. is joining this in spite of Canada, rather than because of anything Canada has done. Indeed, as I will discuss a little more shortly, it has been obvious to most trade observers that Canada has been entirely uninterested in securing a new deal with the United Kingdom. In my view, this is part of a developing broader pattern with the government of an entirely unimaginative trade strategy. As my hon.”
“The government can negotiate and agree to things in international law, but it is Parliament that ultimately has the authority and the ability to make the decision whether or not to change Canadian domestic law. On this point, I share my concerns with my colleagues from the Bloc. With the government, there has been a lack of transparency in these negotiations, a lack of transparency in, in fact, all of the negotiations related to trade that the government is currently engaging in. I think more would be better. Normally, I would be getting up in the House to congratulate any government that wants to increase trade around the world. I am certainly a believer in that, but there is really not much to thank Canada for.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House to speak, especially on an important topic close to my heart, that being trade negotiations and free trade in Canada. I just want to start by reminding members of the House what exactly we are doing here today. There has been some discussion that we are talking about accession, or letting the U.K. into the TPP. I am going to call it the TPP. I think we can drop the charade from the previous prime minister, who forced an unwieldy name on us. By letting the U.K. into the TPP, what we are doing here today, as Parliament, is deciding whether to change Canadian law to allow the United Kingdom preferential access to the Canadian market. This is something Parliament must do.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North mentioned the so-called expertise of the Prime Minister . I have to disagree with that. If he were such an expert, we would have negotiated a win with the U.K. and we would have gotten to a bilateral agreement, instead of having to settle for the TPP agreement, which would provide Canadian businesses less access. It has been 18 months since we allowed parts of the TCA to expire. In that time, many Canadian businesses have had to pay duties on products going into the United Kingdom because of it. Will the government make those businesses whole for the duties they paid because of the expiration?”
“Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague will know, part of what this agreement would do if it were to pass into domestic legislation is commit the Government of Canada to allowing U.K. businesses to bid on government procurement contracts, including at the provincial level. As my hon. colleague spoke about her own province, I am sure she will have checked with Nova Scotia to see if it agrees with allowing foreign businesses to bid on Nova Scotian contracts when we are trying to promote Canadian businesses. In fact, members across the way have been saying consistently that we need to buy more Canadian and support Canadian businesses. Has she checked with her home province to see whether it agrees to provide access to its provincial government procurement?”
“Mr. Speaker, it seems the Liberals want to pat themselves on the back. It has been four years since the trade continuity agreement with the United Kingdom came into force, and they did nothing with it. In fact, they walked away from those negotiations, but they seem to want the credit for the U.K. doing its work to get itself into the CPTPP. Should we not at least get something from the United Kingdom for our support for its accession to this agreement? Does my colleague see anything in this agreement that the government has negotiated for?”
“Madam Speaker, I thank the government for bringing forward this bill, but it will forgive me if I do not give it a pat on the back for doing something it should have done years ago. It was no surprise that the U.K. was going to need trade agreements with countries around the world. It had Brexit in 2017. We had a trade continuity agreement that the Liberals let expire, to the detriment of our businesses. They suffered by paying higher tariffs going into the U.K. because the Liberals let that continuity agreement expire. Why did it take five years to get an agreement that is worse than the one we had previously? We used to have the CETA with the European Union, which provided better and more liberalizing access for Canada. Why did we have to wait five years to get a worse deal?”
“Mr. Speaker, the only thing the government is doubling is the debt the next generation will have to pay. So-called generational investment is just generational debt and generational inequality. In fact, Habitat for Humanity now says 70% of Canadians say owning a home is impossible, and for those who rent, they saw a 5% increase year over year. This is the result of Liberal policies. Will the Prime Minister sacrifice his policies rather than the future of the next generation?”
“Mr. Speaker, despite all of these programs, the Prime Minister still went to students yesterday and gave them a message: They must sacrifice more. Well, the next generation has sacrificed enough. They have sacrificed the dream of home ownership. They have sacrificed the dream of starting a family. He might as well have said, let them eat cake. If the next generation has sacrificed enough after 10 years, will the Prime Minister reverse course and get his spending under control so the next generation of young Canadians can afford to feed themselves and own a home?”
“Mr. Speaker, our border is not secure. The Liberals have promised 1,000 border agents to protect our borders from illegal immigration, fentanyl and other criminal issues, including gun crimes. However, the Liberals' response is that maybe they will get to it in five years, that maybe in five years, they will hire the 1,000 new border officers. No, our border is not secure.”
“Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the Liberal government, as we have seen over the last 10 years of it being in power, simply does not trust Canadians. The Liberals do not have faith in Canadians that they can run their own lives or decide what they want to read or watch online or on the Internet. Instead, for every societal problem the Liberals see, it is more government intervention, more government censorship and more government bureaucrats telling them how they should lead their life. I am part of this party because we believe in Canadians. We believe Canadians are smart enough, wise enough and capable enough to run their own lives without any instruction from the Liberal government.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for pointing out yet another example of the Liberals' mess in our immigration system. We have people coming across irregularly and illegally, and that is unacceptable. We cannot have a government that allows people to skip the line and break the rules over those who are trying to do things the right way and trying to come to Canada for the right reasons. It is totally unacceptable.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like the member opposite to have some reflection on the members of his own caucus, who through the last several years, have called to defund our police. The member for Victoria , in 2020, posted on social media that the police should be defunded. The member for London West attended a “defund the police” rally in her riding. Do not tell us about support for the police. In the last election, the police unions endorsed and supported the Conservatives, not the Liberals, because they know we support them. We are tough on crime, and the Liberals are not.”
“There would be no warrant, no trial and no due process. Another example is Bill C-9 , which has more unprecedented power for the police to control and to police speech on the Internet. Over all, it seems like, of the legislation the Liberals have introduced thus far, the majority trample on our liberties as Canadians. This is the Liberals' pattern. They might have a new leader and call themselves a new government, but they exhibit all of the same habits as they had before. Whether it is with Bill C-2 , Bill C-8 , Bill C-9 or now Bill C-12 , it seems for every societal problem, there is another Liberal bill ready to erode our freedom, my freedom and the liberty of all Canadians.”
“It would allow Canada Post to open mail without a warrant. As a lawyer, I know that a warrant is a basic protection that we, as normal, average citizens, have fought for hundreds of years to maintain to protect us from the arbitrary power of the state. Bill C-2 is not the only attack on liberties that Canadians have endured under this government. Bill C-8 , which we have discussed, would give unprecedented power to the government to kick Canadians off the Internet, on “reasonable grounds” in respect of “any threat”. What is “any threat”? I have been here for just over six months, and I have already been accused several times, by members from the opposite side, of spreading misinformation because they do not like my opinion. Am I now a “threat” to the government, and will I be kicked off the Internet?”
“Last, I want to talk about civil liberties because, for all these messes, whether it is the mess on the border or the mess in our immigration system, for some reason, it seems the Liberals' response is always to attack our liberty. The monstrosity that is Bill C-2 , from which Bill C-12 emerged, is just one more example of the pattern of the Liberal disregard for the freedoms and liberties of Canadians. To be clear, I want to make a point that our freedoms, my freedoms and everyone's freedoms in Canada do not emanate from Parliament or princes. We have freedom and liberty, because we are made in God's image and are human beings endowed with those by our creator, but Bill C-2 remains before the House. It would allow law enforcement to snoop on Canadians without judicial authorization.”
“(1220) The government promised during the election to hire 1,000 new border officers, but we have discovered that was just another empty Liberal promise. More than six months later, they have hired only a few dozen and, in fact, do not have a plan to hire any more. The CBSA says that it has turnover of between 600 and 700 officers a year, so even at normal speeds, it would take over five years to hire 1,000 new officers. The Minister of Public Safety himself admitted in an interview that it would take five years to hire 1,000 new officers, and that is not even talking about the backlog and vacancies the CBSA has. The Customs and Immigration Union says there is a 3,000-officer vacancy rate and shortage on the border force.”
“The cherry on the top of this is that the very minister responsible for our public safety is himself interceding on behalf of members of terrorist organizations. Let me turn to the border and talk about what a mess the government has made of our borders. Fentanyl, of course, is still making its way into Canada. In fact, earlier this year, in the town of Georgina, in my riding of York—Durham, the York Regional Police broke up the largest drug trafficking ring in our town's history, under Project Madruga, through which 1400 grams of fentanyl were discovered. To put that into perspective, two milligrams is enough to kill a human adult. The York Regional Police said that they had never seen a drug trafficking problem or ring of this size or scope in Georgina.”
“In 2021, over four years ago, he pleaded guilty to sexual assault against a minor and was sentenced to 20 months in prison. Beginning in 2022, he was advised that he could be inadmissible to Canada because of the serious nature of his crimes. For over four years, he has fought his deportation. How can it be that a non-citizen who has pleaded guilty to sexual assault against a minor is still in Canada after four years? Bill C-12 , despite being called a fix to our immigration system, does nothing for this. These are not isolated incidents, because we know that, despite the strong border rhetoric and the fix to immigration allegedly coming from the government, we have lost track of hundreds of serious criminals in this country.”
“Despite all that and despite the serious nature of the crime and its effect on its victims, which the court acknowledged, the court went on to accept “serious collateral immigration consequences”. The result was a jail sentence of only five and a half months. Why? That is a bit of a strange number. Why five and a half months, when in fact the court said the proper sentence should be somewhere between six and 12 months? It was because a jail sentence of six months would have made him inadmissible to Canada. In other words, he would have had to leave Canada if he were to receive a sentence of six months. However, we did not get that because the Liberals have so screwed up our immigration system. Last is the case of Mr. Biron, a permanent resident from the Philippines.”
“His bedroom was in the basement beside the laundry room, which was shared by all the residents. The laundry room was beside the bathroom, which was also shared amongst the roommates. Over a period of many months, Mr. Sajeevan used a peephole in the laundry room to spy on his female roommates in various states of undress. In July of this year, Mr. Sajeevan pleaded guilty to voyeurism, despite some initial agreement on sentencing and some very troubling victim impact statements from those who had been spied upon. The court went on to say, “The emotional and psychological harm caused is palpable...Mr. Sajeevan's offending has had a significant and enduring impact on his victims.” The court called it “more than curiosity; it was sustained predation”.”
“Khant, the person he tried to purchase sexual services from was the Peel Regional Police human trafficking unit, as part of Project Juno. Rather than a jail sentence, Mr. Khant received a conditional discharge. Why would that be? In the words of the court, “Mr. Khant is a permanent resident seeking Canadian citizenship and professional licensing. A conviction would not only delay his citizenship by four years but could also prevent him from sponsoring his wife and obtaining his engineering licence.” If people commit crimes in Canada and they are not Canadian citizens, they should no longer be in Canada. Just over two weeks ago, there was the case of Mr. Sajeevan, an Indian citizen in Canada on a student visa. He was a roommate with several others, including several female roommates at a home in Barrie.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House to speak. I will be speaking to Bill C-12 , an act respecting certain measures relating to the security of Canada's borders and the integrity of the Canadian immigration system. What a laughable title from a government that has made such a mess of both our borders and our immigration system. Let me talk about the mess the government has made of immigration. I want to share three short stories. The first is the case of Mr. Khant from earlier this year. He was a permanent resident, originally a citizen of India. He pleaded guilty to attempting an indecent act. That is a bit of a legalistic way of saying that Mr. Khant tried to purchase sexual services from a minor. Unfortunately for Mr.”
“Madam Speaker, when a member makes an accusation that another member is engaging in misinformation, I believe it is incumbent on that member to back that up with facts. When I quote from the Liberal's legislation, and it is accused that it is misinformation, that is simply not true. Despite the parliamentary secretary's response, I did not hear an answer to my very simple question, which is this: Will the new bail legislation that the Liberal government has promised repeal the principle of restraint?”
“Would the new legislation repeal the principle of restraint that currently requires violent offenders to be released “at the earliest reasonable opportunity and on the least onerous conditions”, yes or no?”
“Madam Speaker, in response to my question in June about the over 70% increase in major assaults in Ontario since 2015, the Secretary of State for Combatting Crime assured me new legislation was coming that would solve this problem. It is now well past June, and we still do not have that legislation, but I understand it is coming. In fact, the situation is much worse than just a few months' delay. We have had 10 years of the Liberal government, and in fact, it has created the mess with bail through Bill C-5 and Bill C-75 . The Prime Minister has made some comments about what the legislation would include, but I have a very simple question for the parliamentary secretary.”
“Mr. Speaker, there is one thing I would like to get the member's opinion on. Members on the opposite side in the last couple of years both attended defund the police rallies and specifically called to defund the police. I wonder how the member, as a former law enforcement officer, feels about the calls from that side of the aisle to defund his colleagues in the police force.”
“Mr. Speaker, one thing we need to remind ourselves of in the House is that it was members on the other side who called to defund the police and attended “defund the police” rallies. I think that is despicable. What are my hon. member's views on the Liberal members' opinions that we should defund our police?”
“The petitioners call upon the government to do three things: one, list or identify water soldier as an invasive species; two, nominate a single federal department to take responsibility for this issue; and three, allocate sufficient funding to the water soldier working group so that it can undertake remediation efforts.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition on behalf of the people of Keswick in my riding of York—Durham, specifically in the community around Young's Harbour, about a new invasive species that was discovered in Cook's Bay in Lake Simcoe last year called water soldier. This petition identifies that water soldier is a threat to human health because of its serrated leaves. It is a threat to our native plant and fish species, and it is possibly a threat to our agriculture given its proximity to the Holland River. The petition draws attention to the good work of the water soldier working group, which is chaired and led by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters. This week, it will be hosting an information session in my riding.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is fond of giving Canadians so-called economic lessons as though he alone commands the keys to wisdom. Well, let me share with him a lesson from the unforgiving school of real life and reality. When governments run huge deficits, they unleash the scourge of inflation. When inflation rises, it strikes at the heart of our communities. The Georgina Community Food Pantry now feeds twice as many families because those families can no longer afford to feed themselves. We have four simple things the government can do to reform itself and reverse course in this upcoming budget: eliminate the industrial carbon tax on farms and fertilizer; get rid of the fuel tax on the trucks that deliver our food and scrap the industrial carbon tax; scrap the food packaging tax; and stop printing money.”
“Madam Speaker, there has been discussion on the existing provisions of the Criminal Code and whether they adequately address existing expressions of hate or alleged hate. I wonder whether the member has a position or an opinion on the existing provisions of section 319 in the code and how they might address the issues that we are talking about today.”
“The petitioners therefore call upon the government to reject recommendations 429 and 430 of the report from the finance committee and to protect, defend and uphold the right of charities to advance religion and help their communities.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of concerned Canadians with regard to the Liberal and NDP proposal in the finance committee's report, in recommendations 429 and 430, to revoke the charitable status of pro-life and religion-affiliated organizations in Canada. Roughly 40% of charities in Canada would be affected by this measure. In fact, the petitioners note that Cardus, a very thoughtful Christian think tank, has quantified that the economic effect of the benefits that communities receive are over 10 times the cost to the Canadian government. However, we know that charities do not do this because of economics; they do it to help the most vulnerable in our communities.”
“The residents of my riding who signed this petition therefore call on the government to repeal Bill C-21 and all relevant orders in council, regulations and other laws concerning the prohibition and confiscation of firearms; cancel the gun confiscation program; apologize to legal firearms owners in Canada; and compensate them for the loss of the use and enjoyment of their firearms.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to lay before the House today. The first petition is from citizens in my riding in the community of Blackstock in the Township of Scugog with respect to the public safety minister 's gun confiscation plan. The petitioners point out that the government is trying to ban and confiscate the hunting rifles and shotguns of law-abiding hunters and sport shooters, and that Canada already has one of the most sensible and responsible regimes for controlling firearms anywhere in the world. Moreover, the petitioners note that it is not legal firearms that are the cause of gun violence in this country, but illegal firearms flooding across the border.”
“However, he did not speak very much about the substance of the bill, so let me bring everyone back to the substance of the bill, and specifically the proposed subsection 15.1 (1) and 15 (2) orders, which would provide the minister or the Governor in Council sweeping powers to address what it calls “manipulation, disruption”, or anything. I would hope the hon. member could help to assure me that those powers would not be used to crush dissent that it views as manipulation in the system.”
“Madam Speaker, I want to reflect on something the member said about the last Parliament, which is that we engaged in some sort of frivolous activities. I hope he will reflect on that, because I do not think any hon. member would suggest that it is frivolous for the House to defend its historic privileges to demand any information it requires to make its decisions. I hope he will reflect on that. The member spoke a lot about, in his comments, the problems that Canadians face with respect to cybersecurity. I would agree with him on many of them.”
“Madam Speaker, during the last exchange with my colleague, I believe I heard the member for Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas accuse my hon. colleague of being a Russian asset. If I was mistaken, I apologize, but if I am correct, I would invite him to withdraw that comment or say it outside.”
“Madam Speaker, I admit, it is sometimes difficult to translate Liberal hypocrisy, but let me say what the Liberal plan has led to: a crime problem, a gun problem, a leaky border problem and an illegal gun problem. That has led to a “Canadians do not feel safe” problem. That is the minister's number one job: keep Canadians safe. Instead of that and instead of hiring border and RCMP officers, he is wasting $750 million on a program he knows will not work. It is the responsibility of every leader to accept the consequence of their actions, however heavy they may be. Will the Prime Minister do that today and fire the minister?”
“Madam Speaker, in private, the minister told us the truth. In public, he said his words were misunderstood and mis-characterized. Well, let me translate for him. “[I]f I were to redo this...from scratch, I would have a very different approach”. Translation: The minister does not believe in his plan. “This is the mandate I was given.... Just put an end to this and move on”. Translation: It is about politics, not public safety. “Don't ask me to explain the logic to you on this.” Translation: This plan will not work. Canadians do not have confidence in the minister. How long will the Prime Minister stand behind him?”
“Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary said the Liberals are trying to make it easier for Canadians to enter the housing market. I think she should walk down any street in Ontario. It is harder than ever to buy a home. At no point in history has it been harder to buy a home in this country. That is not getting better; that is only getting worse. In fact, the president of the Residential Construction Council of Ontario said, “Housing projects have been shelved and the industry has hit a wall. The outlook is bleak, and we are trending in the wrong direction.” Their prescription was “to lower the tax burden and modernize the [building] process” and get government out of the way. What was not in their prescription was a fourth bureaucracy to build homes that people do not want.”
“Of course the reality was quite different, because the villages were fake, and the villagers were just actors. If we fast-forward to summer 2025, the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure presided over a modern-day Potemkin village, where the Prime Minister announced housing construction in front of a housing construction scene. The problem for the Prime Minister, just like it was for Catherine the Great at the time, is that it was just a scene. The cranes and construction buildings were just a scene, just like out of a Hollywood movie, because the Liberals are not building homes; they are building illusions. My question to the parliamentary secretary is this: Will the minister agree that he has failed to reverse the market stall, change course and let Canadians buy homes?”
“The numbers are equally troubling for the largest housing market in the country, Toronto, of course, where housing starts for singles, semis and row housing are down 40%. The report goes on to say, “This is a clear indication that Ontario’s housing situation will get worse”. Young people need a house they can afford, not a Brookfield-built, government-approved shipping container. Let me go over a bit of history for the parliamentary secretary . During the reign of Catherine II, former empress of Russia, it is alleged that during her tour of the Crimean region, her lover and minister, Grigory Potemkin, went before her to set up villages along the Nepa River so that as the empress came down the river to tour her empire, she and her foreign entourage would see thriving villages full of happy villagers.”
“The Building Industry and Land Development Association confirms that the market stall continues, despite the minister's promising to reverse it. BILD says that new home sales in August were down 81% below their 10-year average, and new condos were 90% below their 10-year average. Another study released this week, by Missing Middle Initiative and the Residential Construction Council of Ontario, provides some stark numbers on the ongoing market stall. In the town of Georgina, in my neck of the woods, total housing starts in the first half of 2025 for singles, semis and row housing were just 42; that is nearly 60% below the previous four-year average. In the town of Stouffville, another town in my riding, the number was just 12.”
“Mr. Speaker, in June I stood in the House and asked the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure about the housing market and the housing market's stall in the GTA. I noted at that time to the minister that housing sales in the GTA were 89% below their 10-year average. In response, the minister agreed with me in part; in fact he said, “We are seeing a stall in the market as people wait for that cut.” The cut the minister was referring to was the GST cut for first-time homebuyers, and then he invited me and my colleagues in the Conservative Party to support that proposal. We kept our end of the bargain; we worked co-operatively with the government and supported the cut on the GST for first-time homebuyers. Unfortunately, the minister has not kept up his end of the bargain.”