Grant Jackson
Brandon—Souris, Manitoba · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think it was very audible, the government whip shouting across that a member was a “liar” in the House. You previously ruled on a heckle that called another member a “liar”, and the member was asked to retract that statement. I would ask, Mr.”
“Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister minds addressing whether any of this money would be available for municipalities that are quite small. Despite their not being perhaps as flashy as big announcements in the major cities across Canada, these municipalities, in previous Liberal iterations of bloated federal government programs and fundi…”
“Mr. Speaker, I find it very unfortunate that the member for Winnipeg North would accuse this member of the things that he has put on the record today. I think that is a pretty disturbing accusation to put on the record.”
“Mr. Speaker, I do not think we will be trusting the minister's word on what a .22 is, given that he did not know what an RPAL is either. Manitoba's premier, Wab Kinew, recently said that the Prime Minister is requiring LNG to be shipped through the port of Churchill by 2030 as a requirement for federal support of the port of Churchill plu…”
“Mr. Speaker, it always amazes me that the theme for the government should be that someday they will get it done, and that member is certainly no exception to that rule. He is in charge of planning for the government, in terms of the House schedule, as is the House leader he serves. That member has been elected in this House since 2010.”
“Mr. Speaker, despite leading Canada into a recession, the Prime Minister continues living in luxury, racking up $1 million in inflight catering alone. Meanwhile, more and more Manitoba families are struggling just to put food on the table.”
The complete record
Every one of 325 lines we hold for Grant Jackson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 7.
“Again, there was nothing about food production, so I would like to give the agriculture minister one more chance. Given that it is his responsibility as the minister responsible for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, could he please inform my constituents in western Manitoba, and all Canadians, what the government is doing to increase domestic food production so Canadians can have cheaper produce and goods at the grocery store?”
“I was asking about the need to produce more food in this country to bring down costs. More supply would mean lower costs for Canadian consumers at the grocery store. This is after I had asked a question of the agriculture minister , and one question was enough for him. His response to my question about what his department, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, is doing to increase food production in this country was this: Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the hon. member disagrees with child care, dental care, the Canada child benefit, the national school food program, the Canada groceries and essentials benefit, an increase in health transfers, the OAS, eliminating the carbon tax, a tax break for 22 million Canadians.... He then went on to say, “there is no more” and sat down as his own cabinet members were heckling him.”
“Madam Speaker, this topic will not be a stranger to you. I think I was asking about it the last time you were in the chair. I had the privilege of asking a question of the minister responsible for food production. We have an affordability crisis. People are struggling to pay their bills, particularly at the grocery store and at the checkout. Here is what the Minister of Women and Gender Equality replied: Mr. Speaker, Canadians need real relief right now, and we are delivering. I have great news. The very first Canada groceries and essentials benefit is going to Canadians right across the country this June.... From grocery support to child care and dental care, we are there. Of course, members already heard today that we are lowering the cost at the pumps by 28¢ per litre. There is nothing in there about food production.”
“Edwards donated $4 million to create the Russ Edwards School of Agriculture and Environment aimed at the college's vision to build the Prairie Innovation Centre for Sustainable Agriculture, a project that is still waiting on federal investment, I might add. The Edwards family's generosity is bringing enhanced educational opportunities closer to home for more Westman students, which is a remarkable legacy for two highly successful leaders in the business and health care sectors. I thank Russ and Edna.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am proud to recognize two remarkable Manitobans who are giving back in Brandon—Souris. Earlier this month, it was announced that the late Mrs. Edna Edwards left a $4-million contribution to the Assiniboine College School of Nursing dedicated to funding research opportunities and financial awards for students. The now Edna Edwards School of Nursing will honour her legacy as a registered psychiatric nurse who was trained at the former Brandon Mental Health Centre, a facility that now forms part of Assiniboine College's North Hill campus, a truly full-circle moment. The gift was announced by her husband, Mr. Russ Edwards, who is no stranger to Assiniboine College or to Brandon. Just four years ago, Mr.”
“I am really hopeful that the Liberals will step up, pass the bill, send it to committee, move it through the system and get it passed so that the member for Cariboo—Prince George and all of the advocates who have been asking for this, as well as health care professionals, get the support they need. Let us get the bill passed. Let us make health care professionals safer in Brandon—Souris, in Manitoba and in Canada.”
“They need to step up for the health care professionals who work at this facility, as well as those at the Grace and St. Boniface emergency rooms. This is not just for the people in my riding, but for the people in Winnipeg and all of us from rural Manitoba who end up, in large part, having to go to Winnipeg's major hospitals for specialty surgical services and other things. We need to make sure that the health care professionals there are safe. There are a number of workers who have been attacked, not just in the emergency rooms or in hospital rooms, but also in the parkades where they park their car. This is tragic. It is a horrific incidence.”
“There is nothing in the bill that tries to diminish that in any way, but for repeat offenders who are committing violence against our health care professionals, there must be consequences for those actions. Perhaps, if it is dealt with through the court system as an aggravating factor, these folks who are experiencing and perpetrating this violence would get connected with the services they need to navigate their way back to a healthier life. I know the Liberals know all about this, because the Health Sciences Centre is Manitoba's hospital. It is located in Winnipeg. It has some of the worst cases of violence against health care professionals in the country. (1150) There are a series of Liberal MPs who represent Winnipeg.”
“They are obligated to provide health care to that individual and everybody else who is in the waiting room, and they are not safe when that individual is around. That is a major problem. This bill would go a long way toward ensuring specifically that violence against a health care professional in their place of work is considered an aggravating factor in sentencing. There has to be some repercussions for these folks. We know that they are often experiencing some type of breakdown, whether it is an addiction crisis or a mental health crisis of their own, and we have services available for that. The provinces are obligated to make services available in our health care system to get those people the care they need to bring them back to a healthy lifestyle.”
“Just because their workplace happens to sometimes be on the streets of our communities, that does not mean that they should be any less safe when they step up for Canadians. In Manitoba, and in my constituency of Brandon—Souris, the Brandon firefighter and paramedic service does excellent work, as does the health care staff at the Brandon Regional Health Centre and the many rural hospitals that I represent across the Brandon—Souris constituency. These folks are nervous. They come to my office and say that they have seen the same person come in over and over again. Every time, there is a violent incident, and there are no repercussions for that person. They say there is nothing that they can do to prevent this from happening.”
“They can be coming to work, leaving work, in the emergency room or responding to a call on the street. Individuals get bitten or stabbed with dirty needles. There are all kinds of other physical or violent assaults. This is just simply and completely unacceptable for anyone in the health care profession, whether they are new to the job or have been doing it for 30 years. It is totally unacceptable to Canadians that these people, who are on our front lines, stepping up to protect Canadians and do what they can to save our lives when we get into accidents or have other types of health care issues, are being assaulted in their places of work. We all expect a safe workplace, and our health care professionals should too.”
“I hear about it all the time, unfortunately, from health care professionals, whether they are paramedics, firefighters responding to 911 calls or health care professionals in our emergency rooms, which are becoming a cross between a traditional emergency room, a detox centre and all kinds of different mental health crisis facilities. Our health care professionals are struggling under the weight of the addiction and mental health crisis going on in this country right now. Unfortunately, many of the individuals coming in are repeat violent offenders who need help, but we have to ensure that protections are in place for our health care workers. I hear too often from young nurses and young health care professionals from many different professions that they were assaulted, attacked in some way, shape or form.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to stand today to put a few words on the record about Bill S-233 . I know, although I am a new member, that it has been here before in different formats. I am very glad to see that it is back on the floor of the House of Commons again for debate. Of course, it is unfortunate that it did not pass previously and has not been in effect, but at least it has made its way back here now so we can try to get it through one last time to ensure protections are in place for our health care officials. I want to thank my colleague from Cariboo—Prince George . I know that this has been a passion project of his for a long time, something he has been championing across the country. It is a big issue.”
“Conservatives support getting this well-intentioned bill to committee, where we can strengthen it by strengthening safeguards to ensure controlled and addictive substances can not be added to the pre-approved list; improving oversight and accountability around the minister's authority and the advisory committee responsible for review products; closing loopholes that could allow pharmaceutical companies to bypass Canada's existing regulatory approval process; and ensuring the emergency authorization process includes clear independence and verification standards for expert clinicians.”
“While the principle makes sense on the surface, the bill offers no way to ensure these individuals are independent from one another or a verification that one of the two experts is not the practitioner responsible for treating the patient who is seeking the approval. There must be checks and balances in place to ensure drugs added to the pre-approved list and that received the letters of authorization meet clearly defined and verified safety standards. In closing, Conservatives stand firm in our belief that Canadians deserve timely access to health care. We appreciate that the member is trying to deal with that very real and challenging issue many Canadians face. We also believe that when they access that care, Canadians should not lose their life savings because of unforeseen health complications or expensive prescription drugs.”
“Finally, our concern is that Bill C-265 would open the door for corporate influence that directly contradicts safeguards already in place for pharmaceutical companies that want their products in the Canadian market. I know the previous member has spoken to that already today. The bill seeks to allow those therapeutic products that are placed on the pre-approved drug list to be exempt from the Food and Drug Act's regulatory power, which means companies could sell their products in Canada without being subject to the stringent reviews that Health Canada requires of the normal process. A similar regulatory bypass created in this bill comes in the presumption of approval for a letter of authorization if just two expert clinicians put forward a joint treatment plan.”
“This bill would also create blind spots within the pharmaceutical approval process and a lack of oversight of which products are added to the pre-approved list. Not only would it give the minister the power to add or remove products, but it would also allow them to set criteria, standards and conditions without limitations. A potential safeguard to put in place to ensure due diligence with the pre-approved list is an advisory committee that would need to be consulted before the list is amended. Unfortunately, we have no idea who would sit on that committee or who would determine its composition. Given the important role this advisory committee would play, Conservatives would need to understand its composition and ensure the selection standards are clear.”
“These are provisions that were removed by a previous government, after having been on the list in the past. Simply put, this would mean health care practitioners could access substances like pharmaceutical-grade heroin, even though they are considered restricted or illegal drugs in Canada. Under the previous Harper Conservative government, intentional restrictions were placed on the special access program to prevent the approval of many such restricted substances. Despite that work being reversed by Trudeau Liberals, we have an opportunity with this bill to get it right and prevent addictive substances from being placed on this pre-approved list where they could pose significant risks to our public health.”
“That said, I want to be clear that we do see potential in this bill and how, in principle, it could benefit Canadians who struggle with different stages of accessing these therapeutic products that may have already been approved and are used by other Canadians. To get this bill right, considerations must be given to how it would come into force and what unintended consequences it might have without key amendments. One of our broader concerns with this legislation is the lack of a safeguard against controlled substances like diacetylmorphine, also known as heroin, being included on the list. As written, the new authorization process creates an avenue for the Minister of Health to potentially add harmful and illegal substances to the pre-approved list.”
“Bill C-265 would also reinforce the basic principle that health care practitioners should be able to use therapeutic products that are legally available when in the best interest of their patients, which we should all be able to support. (1405) Conservatives understand how and why the special access program needs refinements, and we appreciate the member opposite for bringing forward some proposed solutions to that program. However, we do have a few concerns with the bill, which I hope to outline here as well. Without guardrails in place, the bill has the ability to create risk here in Canada, both for the health of Canadians and the influence of corporations.”
“To address these flaws with the special access program, Bill C-265 , which we are considering today, offers important changes that attempt to reshape how unlicensed or non-marketed products are accessed by Canadians. Bill C-265 seeks to make amendments to the Food and Drugs Act to require the Minister of Health to create a publicized list of pre-approved, non-marketed therapeutic products to treat serious or life-threatening conditions. This would include a 120-day deadline for the minister to make a decision about adding such a product to the list. Further, the bill would set limits and criteria related to the Minister of Health's power to refuse emergency letters of authorization for pharmaceutical products.”
“At desperate moments in the lives and the health care journeys of those suffering with severe conditions or concerns, this delay often results in thousands of Canadians' losing critical hours, days, weeks or months waiting for a letter or a response to their request, in other words, bureaucratic approvals, as they watch their health decline. In some cases, Canadians lose this precious time waiting just to find out that it is not a positive response and that their application has been denied by the program. This can lead applicants to seek out alternative treatments outside the country or even leave them, sadly, in too many cases, with nowhere else to turn. Canadians deserve timely access to care, and Conservatives understand that bureaucratic delays are a problem with the program.”
“Instead, approval for use is given on a case-by-case basis by the special access program for each patient seeking access to these unapproved or non-marketed therapeutic products, even if another Canadian was already approved for the same prescription drug. This has created a system where treatment has been proven effective in other countries, and even approved for other Canadians and proven effective, but, because of the administrative burdens of the program, it is still out of reach for new individuals who are diagnosed with a particular condition and who need access. Receiving over a thousand applications monthly, or more than 12,000 applications each year, the special access program has been a critical pathway for Canadians to receive medications that could help them, but it faces significant delays.”
“Health Canada's current special access program was set up to address this issue, but it has serious flaws. The program exists as a way to get non-marketed drugs that have been proven safe into the hands of the Canadians who, oftentimes, have no other options. The issue is that this process of actually accessing these products can be lengthy and overly bureaucratic. The special access program has strict rules requiring health care practitioners to apply for what is known as a letter of authorization before they can access certain non-marketed therapeutic products for a patient. Health practitioners in Canada are unable to prescribe unlicensed or non-marketed products in the same way they would for medications that are already available in Canada and to Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to put a few words on the record about the important bill before Parliament today. Bill C-265 is a piece of legislation that seeks to address an important issue that affects Canadians who are struggling with serious and life-threatening medical conditions. The reality is that, in Canada, individuals suffering from serious medical conditions or rare diseases may not be able to access the vital therapeutic products that are designed to help them when conventional treatments cannot. Some therapeutic products might not be approved for use in Canada and others are not marketed in Canada. These products may be well-established and approved by jurisdictions that Canada trusts, but Canadians cannot access them in the way they typically can access other drugs or other health products.”
“Mr. Speaker, the numbers speak for themselves. Jobs among young people are down, not up, despite what that member has to say in the House. Young Canadians want a job and a home they can afford, neither of which they can get after 10 years of the same tired Liberals. Youth unemployment is over 14%. Housing starts are down. No new major projects are approved, and more Canadians are investing in the U.S. and the EU than in Canada. No Liberal social program is going to fix that. We need a competitive market so that investors can invest, builders can build and young Canadians can get to work. When will the Liberals get out of the way so that young Canadians can get to work and build this country?”
“Mr. Speaker, the unemployment numbers are in for April, and Canadians are devastated, particularly young Canadians. After being forced to watch Liberal spending grow month over month, young Canadians continue to see job losses month over month. In April alone, youth unemployment rose to 14.3%, and student unemployment is over 16%. More young Canadians are unemployed now than at any time since 1976. This is a crisis for young people. Where is the urgency from the Liberal government to deal with this? Is the plan simply to keep young Canadians unemployed, homeless, desperate and reliant on Liberal government programs to stay alive?”
“Mr. Speaker, the only result of the last two Liberal speakers who gave those speeches is, unfortunately, that any Canadian who had to listen to them will likely have a hard time tying their shoes tonight, but I digress. I just wonder where the B.C. Liberal caucus is. The last speaker was from Manitoba. The one before that was from Saskatchewan. They are under the numbered treaties. It is a very different legal context when it comes to land claims and fee simple property. Our Conservative B.C. MPs have been out speaking about this issue, which matters to British Columbians. Why are the B.C. Liberal MPs in hiding? Where are they? Why will they not get up and defend the disastrous Liberal record on this issue?”
“Mr. Speaker, in addition to his speech, my colleague has moved a great amendment to what is a disastrous fiscal update from the government. It seems to be unable, despite labelling itself as a “new” Liberal government, to break itself of the habit of continuing to rob the piggy bank of young Canadians and future generations to blow the credit card budget on Liberal fat-cat projects. I wonder if my colleague from Vaughan—Woodbridge has a few more comments to put on the record about what a disaster this fiscal update is for Canadians.”
“Madam Speaker, that is pretty much par for the course with the Liberal government, unfortunately. The question was specifically about food production, and I am not sure the Liberal member across the way used the two-word phrase “food production” at any point in that entire answer, which is par for the course, even more sadly, for the agriculture minister in responding to my questions during question period. He and his parliamentary secretary are clearly too busy tonight to answer these questions. It is an important measure that we need to be addressing because this country needs to grow more food to meet our domestic needs, to bring prices down for Canadians, as well as to continue to feed the world, which so many people from my region and across the Prairies do.”
“What exactly is the government doing to increase food production in Canada, and when will the Liberals finally recognize that when regions like mine that grow the food cannot even afford to buy it, the rest of the country is certainly in crisis?”
“Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today. Last week, I asked the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food about the sorry state of food affordability in Canada and what exactly the government was doing to increase food production in this country. It makes sense to me that if we grow more and produce more food, the price of food should come down. It is not impacted by tariffs that we have seen, nor by inclement weather in other parts of the world, which often affects prices in this country. Unfortunately, the response I got was anything but an answer. The Minister of Agriculture went on to list a whole bunch of programs that have nothing whatsoever to do with food production or increasing it in this country. Therefore, I would like to give the member across the way another crack at the same question.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have a long list of costly programs and a failure to get any major project approved for the province of Manitoba. I have not met a person yet who thinks any of those programs have made food or housing cheaper, or that those costly programs are actually well run. Housing and food have skyrocketed, and our debt has doubled. We have the highest youth unemployment in decades, no new major projects begun, record food bank lines and more children living below the poverty line than in years. These results, despite all the rhetoric about Liberal financial prowess, are the definition of insanity, which is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. After 11 years and no change, do these Liberals not fit the bill?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister unveiled another Liberal credit card budget, the 11th in a row, and doubled the last Trudeau deficit. This year, Canadians will spend $60 billion just to pay the interest on the debt that Canada already owes, and that number is only going up. That is $60 billion that is not going into health care, critical infrastructure, national defence or affordability measures to help Canadians put food on the table or a roof over their head. I have a simple question. What happened to last year's Liberal slogan to spend less, invest more? Was that just a tagline to win an election? Are these guys actually incapable of reducing government spending?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to peddle half measures and broken promises as the answer to the affordability crisis the Liberals created. They have had years to act. Canadians are in need of results, but what they get are recycled speeches and illusions, while food inflation remains the highest in the G7 and the Prime Minister pretends affordability has never been better. With food bank and soup kitchen use in Brandon over capacity month after month in the heart of Canada's breadbasket, when are the Liberals finally going to recognize that when the region that grows the food cannot even afford it, the rest of the country is in crisis?”
“Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals continue to ignore the affordability concerns of Canadians, the reality for families is getting worse. Monday's data shows that here in Canada we continue to carry the highest food inflation in the G7, a badge of shame that we have held for four months in a row. Beef costs 69% more, and the price of chicken is 43% higher than it was in 2015. Working-class families, young Canadians and seniors all feel that inflation every time they leave the grocery store. When are we finally going to see action from the Liberals to increase domestic food production to bring down the cost of food in this country?”
“Mr. Speaker, I think you will reflect that the member for Nunavut questioned the attendance of certain members in the chamber in her comment, which was not a question, and that is, of course, against the rules of this place.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from New Brunswick for that excellent speech. It has certainly been eye-opening, particularly for our members across the way. Despite the second son in that scenario he mentioned perhaps just being a Liberal, we know that good parents love their children whether they vote the way their parents do or not. I wonder if the member down the way would describe in a bit of detail why he thinks the Liberals often get so addicted to the creation of additional bureaucracy to push more issues away from the decision-making of cabinet in order to deflect rather than take accountability for their actions and their own decisions.”
“Mr. Speaker, obviously, it is very alarming to hear reports of the potential that a non-citizen has voted in a Canadian election. We know there are instances where the Chief Electoral Officer has reported that some of those events may or may not have taken place, so they absolutely should be investigated as part of an investigation into someone's application status or where they are within our immigration process. One has to be a citizen to vote in this country. That is the law. It should remain the law. Our institutions need to defend that principle of Canadian democracy.”
“I think it is important that the committee, as part of its debate on this bill, investigate whether those provisions are in place.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her work in past Parliaments and past committees on this topic. It is very concerning to Canadians and Conservatives the position China has. Law enforcement agencies, as well as Global Affairs, have confirmed it is the greatest threat actor to Canadian democracy and one that interferes the most in Canadian elections. That has been very clear from the officials. Chinese vehicles coming into the Canadian market may present a serious security risk. I think the government needs to be held accountable for allowing these vehicles in. What security parameters is it putting in place to ensure that Canadian electors, and the information surrounding the Canadian public in general, are safe and secure while these vehicles come into our market? The member raises a great point.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for that comment. I appreciate the collaboration we have on the procedure and House affairs committee. I am not sure I said in my speech that I do not believe people spreading disinformation should not be held accountable. I think that warrants further study. The bill includes increased powers for the commissioner of Canada elections. It includes increased monetary penalties. I look forward to discussing and debating that further. As I recall, that was not part of the study that we did specific to the longest ballot committee's actions. That is why I believe this bill should move forward to committee stage so we can investigate those positions a little more closely.”
“Through this legislation, I am hopeful that Canada and Canadians could finally take actions that Conservatives have been recommending for some time, which we know are in the best interests of supporting and defending this democratic institution and the process that gets members elected here, to ensure Canadians can have the confidence and the trust in our institutions they deserve. That is their right. That is why I am very glad to support this bill's moving forward to the committee stage.”
“Albert—Sturgeon River , the minister responsible did take it under consideration that the bill would allow a 10% financing gap, and he committed to studying at committee that some of those provisions should be removed from the process or at least looked into at the committee stage. We look forward to the minister's following through on that process. Regardless of the Liberals' failures on this file so far, I am encouraged that the bill has come forward. I am very much looking forward, as a member of the procedure and House affairs committee, to discussing this bill in depth at committee.”
“The commissioner found that “foreign states are trying to interfere in our democratic institutions, including electoral processes.” She expressed serious concerns with foreign interference in the nomination race for a former member for Don Valley North in 2019, and significant events have taken place in the years since. Bill C-25 would take steps to address these election interference gaps, such as prohibiting undue influence by foreigners related to electors' voting, refraining from voting or voting for a specific candidate, party or election. It would also touch on pieces of third-party finance with relation to funds coming from foreign actors. I would recognize that, after questioning from the member for St.”
“Canadians expect their governments to act in the face of all threats to our democracy, whether they be foreign or domestic, in a rapid and decisive manner. This brings me to my second point. While I have concerns with the actions of the Canadians who choose to protest through the longest ballot committee, I also have concerns with the lack of action to combat foreign entities who would seek to influence the outcomes of our election. This meddling by foreign actors in Canadian elections is a pervasive threat to Canada's democracy. These threats are real, and we know where they come from. The Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions was before my time, before I was elected to this place, but I want to thank Commissioner Hogue for her diligence and efforts.”
“However, what I find most troubling about where we are now is the fact that four federal by-elections have taken place since the federal election last year and, in these by-elections, Canadians voted under the pressures of the longest ballot committee, most recently in the riding of Terrebonne earlier this week. The Liberals want to pat themselves on the back for tabling this legislation, but Canadians are right to question why, despite warnings from Conservatives, the Chief Electoral Officer and others, who gave recommendations to prevent this type of disruption all the way back in 2024, it took so long to see legislation developed and debated. It was just a few weeks ago. There will be more to say regarding this at committee. Now, I will transition my comments to the foreign interference part of this piece of legislation.”
“Conservatives have repeatedly called on the Liberal government to get serious, and finally, in Bill C-25 , we have forced the Liberals to produce a piece of legislation in the House that seeks to significantly change the Canada Elections Act. Some of those changes are close to what Conservatives have called for. Other changes in this bill would have significant impacts on administrative monetary penalties in the act and the suggested powers granted to the commissioner of Canada elections. These are among several other changes that need careful consideration and study, so we believe strongly in sending this bill to committee for the in-depth analysis that that part of our legislative process allows.”
“(1515) There were further deliberations, which I was proud to take part of as a member of the procedure and House affairs committee, that resulted in a report with seven or eight recommendations to the government to take action, and we are pleased to see that many of them are reflected in this bill. We are pleased that Bill C-25 would adopt some of our ideas and partially reflect the concerns of the petitioners who took time out of their busy schedules to respond to the need for change in this area. Conservatives have pushed for simple measures like this, which are very clear in their purpose, that would ensure that trust remains a cornerstone of any general election or by-election that takes place in Canada.”
“In July 2025, the leader of the official opposition , who has been the target of several campaigns by the longest ballot committee, and our shadow minister for democratic reform wrote a letter to the Liberal government demanding the rapid implementation of legislation and that priority should be placed on this by the government to protect Canadian federal elections from these tactics. This is why, in October 2025, I was proud to table a petition to Parliament in response to the actions of the longest ballot committee. My petition received hundreds of signatures from Canadians who supported calling on the Government of Canada to amend the Canada Elections Act to prohibit an individual from serving as the official agent for more than one candidate in a federal election.”