Jagsharan Singh Mahal
Edmonton Southeast, Alberta · Conservative · Canada
“Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for opposing this bill for valid and right reasons. I have a question. I agree with him and want to ask him if he can shed more light on this. He quoted a few recent decisions where the courts have turned down the minimum mandatory sentences.”
“Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal Prime Minister , Canada is the only G20 country in a recession. In Edmonton, families are feeling the effects of Liberal mismanagement. A recent United Way survey found that 60% of Canadians now feel anxiety about their personal finances. Global factors are not to blame.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his insight on this new Build Canada Homes bill. We have two Crown corporations: the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and the Canada Lands Company.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the incredible work of the Edmonton Police Service and other law enforcement agencies involved in a two-year-long national drug trafficking investigation.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canada is the only country in the G7 in a recession. There is nothing technical about someone coming home from work and telling their kids that they no longer have a job. Canada's economy has shrunk for two quarters in a row. Business investment is falling. Food bank use is at an all-time high.”
“It is an essential input into almost every part of our economy. The cars that bring our kids to school, hockey practice, soccer games and medical appointments rely on gas. The trucks that bring food to grocery store shelves rely on diesel. The farmers who grow that food rely on fuel.”
The complete record
Every one of 124 lines we hold for Jagsharan Singh Mahal, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for opposing this bill for valid and right reasons. I have a question. I agree with him and want to ask him if he can shed more light on this. He quoted a few recent decisions where the courts have turned down the minimum mandatory sentences. Is it not the duty of the parliamentarians sitting on this side of the House and on the government side of the House, when judges do wrong, to tell them this is not what people at large want or what Canadians want? The real desire of the people is to impose minimum mandatory—”
“Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal Prime Minister , Canada is the only G20 country in a recession. In Edmonton, families are feeling the effects of Liberal mismanagement. A recent United Way survey found that 60% of Canadians now feel anxiety about their personal finances. Global factors are not to blame. It is Liberal inflationary spending and antidevelopment laws that have staled our economy. Canadians deserve better. Will the Prime Minister reverse his costly policies causing this crisis so Canadians can afford to live again?”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his insight on this new Build Canada Homes bill. We have two Crown corporations: the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and the Canada Lands Company. However, over the past 11 years, the Liberals have failed to make use of those two corporations, and now they are pushing for another bureaucracy under the name of Build Canada Homes. Why are the Liberals so adamant on adding more bureaucracy instead of focusing on results and focusing on the real needs of Canadians, which are affordable homes?”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the incredible work of the Edmonton Police Service and other law enforcement agencies involved in a two-year-long national drug trafficking investigation. Police seized approximately 80 kilograms of cocaine with a street value of more than $8 million, along with dangerous narcotics, ammunition and cash. This is a serious reminder of the organized crime networks bringing drugs, violence and fear into our communities. I want to thank the officers who put themselves at risk to keep our streets safe. Police cannot do this alone. They need a justice system that backs them up. After 11 years of Liberal soft-on-crime policies and Liberal bills like Bill C-5 , our streets are more dangerous. To the police officers in Edmonton and across Canada, know that Conservatives support them.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canada is the only country in the G7 in a recession. There is nothing technical about someone coming home from work and telling their kids that they no longer have a job. Canada's economy has shrunk for two quarters in a row. Business investment is falling. Food bank use is at an all-time high. This is not a technical recession. This is a full-blown Liberal recession. If global factors are to blame, then why is Canada the only G7 country in a recession?”
“Mr. Speaker, I could not agree more with what my colleague has said. The government needs to get out of the way when it comes to affordability, when it comes to providing good-paying jobs and when it comes to cutting bureaucracy in this country. We need to make sure that all the steps the government takes make Canadians' lives more affordable, and that is exactly what the proposal is about. The opposition day motion is asking the government to cut fuel taxes by 25¢ per litre on gas and diesel for the rest of the year so Canadians can feel relaxed and there can be immediate relief felt.”
“Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the responsibility of the government to make sure that corporations are held accountable, it has to do more. The increase in oil prices is not just because of global impacts or the war in the Middle East. It is partially because of our own government's wrong policies and its failure to scrap the taxes in a timely manner to provide immediate relief to Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member opposite can say that we are hypocrites when we oppose the subsidies, but those do not go to the base of the issues. It is not the government's job, in a G7 country, to provide people with these kinds of perks. The job of the government should be to make sure that the people of the country have good-paying jobs so they can afford their own food and make choices about which food their children take to school. They should not be dependent upon the school principal's choosing whether they want to feed some chocolate or other non-nutritious food to the kids. That being said, the need of the time is to scrap all the taxes on fuel, gas and diesel so Canadians can feel relaxed for the rest of the year.”
“Just over a year ago, I came to Ottawa with the intention of delivering common-sense solutions for the hard-working people of my community. This is why the motion is so important. Conservatives are offering a clear and practical solution to an issue facing all Canadians. By ending federal taxes on gas and diesel for the rest of the year, including the GST, and permanently scrapping the clean fuel standard, members of the House can make life easier for those who need it most.”
“Canadians do not need more self-praise from Liberal ministers. They need relief, lower costs and a government that understands that when fuel costs more, everything costs more. This motion is about fairness. At a time when Canadians are already stretched thin, the federal government cannot continue taking more from every litre of gas and diesel. It must scrap all federal taxes for a meaningful amount of time, giving working families immediate relief. In my community of Edmonton Southeast, people are not asking for complicated government programs or more Liberal talking points. They are asking for a government that understands their lives and works for them. They are asking for lower costs and no longer want to feel strapped for cash. I will conclude with this.”
“When the finance minister was asked whether the government would extend fuel tax relief, his answer to Canadians was that the Liberals had already acted. I can assure the minister that the residents of my community who are lining up at the pumps do not agree that the government has done enough. The facts are clear. Canadians are paying much more at the pump than Americans, even while global oil prices affect both countries. The difference is not just about world markets. It is about higher Liberal taxes and a government that continues to take more from Canadians when they can least afford it. Other countries have understood the pressures families are facing and have moved to reduce fuel taxes. Meanwhile, the Liberal government offered Canadians a half-baked solution and then congratulated itself.”
“(1335) When fuel becomes more expensive, everything becomes more expensive. The food on our shelves, the material used to build homes and the goods shipped across this country all cost more because fuel costs more. Canadian families have been experiencing this pain every day. Food prices continue to rise faster than household budgets can handle. Families are paying more for meat, vegetables and everyday groceries. The Liberals say they understand affordability. If that is the case, then the government should have no problem supporting this motion. However, after more than 10 years, the same Liberal government continues to support policies that make life more expensive for Canadians. I will give an example of how disconnected the government is from everyday Canadians.”
“Our plan would save Canadians up to 25¢ per litre on gas. That would mean about $20 every time a family fills up a minivan, and up to $1,200 in savings for a family of four over the year. The Liberals have offered only partial relief for part of the year. They suspended one tax for a limited time and then told Canadians they had already acted, but Canadians know the truth. They are still paying too much at the pump, too much at the grocery store and too much for the basic necessities of life. Lowering fuel costs is not only about the price at the pump. It is about the cost of everything that moves this country. Lower diesel prices reduce the cost of trucking. Lower trucking costs reduce the cost of groceries. Lower grocery prices help people in all our communities across the country.”
“Many residents at these seniors homes tell me the same thing: It is getting more expensive for them to visit their grandchildren and families. Seniors are having to decide between buying a tank of gas or buying fresh produce. Our seniors should not have to make the choice between a drive across town to see their grandson's hockey game and a good meal. That is unacceptable. Seniors in my community worked hard, paid taxes, built this country and played by the rules. They should not be punished by a government that keeps adding costs and then acts surprised when Canadians cannot keep up. That is why the Conservatives brought forward this motion calling on the government to adopt our plan, which would suspend all federal taxes on gas and diesel until the end of the year. Our plan is not complicated.”
“It is an essential input into almost every part of our economy. The cars that bring our kids to school, hockey practice, soccer games and medical appointments rely on gas. The trucks that bring food to grocery store shelves rely on diesel. The farmers who grow that food rely on fuel. The planes that bring parliamentarians from coast to coast to coast into this chamber are powered by fuel. The Liberals know this. The Liberals know Canada is a big country. They know millions of Canadians cannot simply stop driving to work, stop transporting goods or stop heating their homes. However, what the Liberals do not seem to understand is the impact their policies are having on working Canadians, on seniors and on families across the country. In my riding of Edmonton Southeast, I recently visited local seniors' residences.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Cariboo—Prince George . One year ago, the community of Edmonton Southeast placed its trust in me to deliver change. After more than a decade of Liberal government, my community feels the effects. Grocery prices are sky-high, streets are unsafe and the fuel that powers their lives is more expensive than ever. Conservatives understand the importance of delivering common-sense solutions. That is why this opposition day motion offers the government an opportunity to deliver relief to Canadians already struggling to make ends meet. Conservatives call upon the Liberal government to act by immediately ending all federal taxes on gas and diesel for the rest of the year, including the GST, and permanently scrapping the clean fuel standard. Fuel is not a luxury.”
“Mr. Speaker, my seasoned colleague has experience working in the House, debating on different committees and going through different pieces of legislation. That is a genuine concern. Let us get rid of red tape. Instead of building it, let us get rid of red tape and focus on the results. Let us make sure that the legislation that we pass does not burden the common Canadian with additional red tape. Rather, let us focus on the results. Let us cut it short and focus on the results, so that Canadians can afford to pay their mortgages, buy a an affordable home and have an affordable life.”
“Mr. Speaker, when it comes to provincial jurisdiction, we must respect it. For any bill that comes to the House and goes to committee, the committee should decide, based on its rationale and based on logic, why the bill should or should not be passed and what changes should or should not be made. Answering the question, yes, any subject that comes under section 92 of the Constitution of Canada shall be left to the provinces, and anything that has a larger impact on the entire nation shall be dealt with accordingly.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, we, in essence, support the legislation. We support the rationale behind the legislation. Conservatives support the idea that consumer fairness should be at the core of every step the government takes. The hon. member raised two questions: one about the rebates that they are offering to Canadians and one about the bill being studied in the committee. Our position is to scrap all of the carbon taxes. The Liberals are just half listening to us. They only decided to get rid of 15¢ per litre. We are asking for 20¢ per litre. That would save a family over $1200 per year. Why do we not leave more money in Canadians' pockets so they do not have to look to the government for rebates and they do not have to look to the government for handouts?”
“It is about making sure that, when Canadians pay for something, they receive what they pay for. Canadians deserve a marketplace that is fair. They also deserve a government that is transparent, restrained and focused on making life more affordable. We will support this bill moving forward. We will ask hard questions, push for accountability and work to ensure that the legislation serves Canadians.”
“We are saying to scrap the federal taxes on gas and diesel for the rest of the year, remove the fuel excise tax, remove the GST on gas and diesel, remove the industrial carbon tax and remove the fuel standard tax. That would mean real relief of up to 25¢ per litre and over $1,200 of savings for a family this year. The bigger issue is not just whether the pump is accurate; it is whether Canadians can afford to use it. Instead of following our plan, the Prime Minister cut only a third of the taxes for a third of the time. Again, the Liberals care more about regulations and control than they do about Canadian wallets. This bill is about trust, but trust is not built through regulations alone. Trust is built through outcomes. At its core, Bill S-3 is about trust in the marketplace.”
“At a time when Canadians are struggling with affordability, the government is pouring more fuel on the fire, so when Canadians feel like everything costs more, they are right. This bill would modernize the inspection framework at the gas pumps. The government regulates these pumps to make sure that people are getting the exact amount they are paying for. This would make sure that Canadians are not being ripped off, but Canadians are not thinking about inspection frameworks when they are standing there watching the numbers climb. They are thinking, “How much is this going to cost me?” Gas prices do not affect just commuters. They affect everything. They drive up the cost of food, goods and transportation. Those costs are built into the price of everything Canadians buy. That is why the Conservatives are calling for real relief.”
“The Prime Minister 's spring economic update unveiled what can only be described as a costly credit budget that would double the deficit left by the previous Liberal government. That means more cost, more taxes, more debt and more inflation for Canadians. Canadians are now paying $59 billion a year just in interest on the debt. That is up by 10% in a single year. It is now more than we spend on health care transfers and more than the government collects in GST. Members can think about that. Every Canadian family is effectively paying about $3,400 a year just to service the federal debt. That is money not going into groceries, not going into housing and not going into savings. Yesterday alone, the government added another $37 billion in new spending.”
“Food inflation has reached levels not seen in decades. Gas prices have gone up. Utilities have gone up. At the same time, wages are not keeping pace, savings are shrinking and families are relying on credit just to get by. Families in my riding are having to choose between paying their bills and putting groceries on the table. Grocery prices are up 25% over just a few years. Prices are still rising year after year. Beef, vegetables and dairy continue to climb. (1705) The average family is expected to spend over $1,000 more for food this year alone. Families are cutting back. Parents are making difficult choices. Seniors on fixed incomes are stretching every dollar. What is the government doing about this? Canadians got the answer yesterday.”
“While I have no ill will toward the individuals, changes to committee composition would give government the power to shut down debate and critical thinking in the committee room. The bill would expands powers. We need to examine how these new powers would be used and whether Canadians would be properly protected. That only works if committee is allowed to be critical. The government cannot ask for more government powers while controlling the very committees meant to hold the powers accountable. The bill is very important, because it is about ensuring Canadians get what they pay for, but Canadians across this country are asking a much bigger question: Can they afford what they are paying for at all? Right now, Canadians feel like they are paying more and getting less. Grocery prices have risen dramatically.”
“Committee is where Parliament does its real work, but committees in this place are changing. Over the past number of days, serious concerns have been raised about how committees would be structured and controlled. Conservatives have been clear that if the government uses its forced, unelected majority to limit scrutiny, it could weaken transparency and accountability. If committees stop functioning as places of independent scrutiny, then where does accountability happen? I sit on the science and research committee. We have worked well together and addressed important issues because there has been a balance. We can have critical views of current policy, as this is how we test these policies. Like many committees, that balance is at risk. There may be two new Liberal members.”
“It would introduce tools like sample-based inspections. The bill presents reasonable objectives. Modernization is necessary. Technology has changed. The economy has changed. Our laws should reflect this reality. Conservatives believe in a fair marketplace. We believe in protecting consumers. We believe that when Canadians pay for a litre of gas, a kilogram of food or a unit of electricity, they should receive exactly that. We support the bill, but there are some concerns. We are right to ask whether more government power means better outcomes for Canadians or just more bureaucracy. We support fairness. We support modernization, but we need to look closely to ensure that the bill does not come at the expense of accountability, transparency and affordability. This is exactly why the bill needs to be studied in committee.”
“Mr. Speaker, when Canadians hear that Parliament is debating a bill about weights and measurements, gas pumps, grocery scales and utility meters, they might assume this is a technical issue, but the bill touches something Canadians experience every day, the moment they pull up to the gas pump, the moment they scan their groceries and the moment their utility bill arrives at the end of the month. The bill touches on trust, because at the most basic level, Canadians expect one simple thing: that if they pay for something, they should get what they paid for. Bill S-3 promises to modernize Canada's trade measurement laws, legislation that has not been touched meaningfully nor updated since the 1980s. The bill would update how we regulate gas pumps, grocery scales, electricity and gas meters.”
“Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister took office, the projected deficit was $31 billion. He promised to spend less. Instead, he spent more. He piled on $90 billion in new spending, not on results but on bigger government. Bureaucracy is up, costs are up and Canadians are paying the price. Will the Prime Minister commit today that his deficit will not exceed the already outrageous $31 billion left behind by his predecessor, yes or no?”
“We all agree that frontline organizations deserve support, but good intentions are not enough. If a law cannot be proven, if it cannot be enforced, then it does not achieve its purpose. Canadians deserve better than that. They deserve a justice system that works. They deserve policies that deliver real results. They deserve communities that are safe, not just in theory, but in reality. For those reasons, and for the reason that I am not convinced it will be viable and practical to collect money from the offenders, even though I have great respect for the intent behind this bill, I cannot support this bill.”
“This is where we need to focus, because accountability is not about new processes that look good on paper. It is about outcomes. It is about strengthening and enforcing laws. This is where the Liberals have failed. They have failed to stop repeat offenders who are committing most of the crime. They have created an in-and-out bail system that puts criminals back on the street. They have relaxed sentencing laws, making it difficult for people to go to jail. They give violent criminals house arrest and no punishment. They have grown the addiction crisis and have focused on safe supply instead of getting people off drugs. Instead of doing the real work, they are pushing legislation that just looks good and does nothing to solve the real issues. This bill is a prime example. We all agree that communities are paying the price for crime.”
“We see increased overdoses on deadly street drugs, and we see immense pressure on shelters and emergency services. Organized criminal activity is becoming more viable and more aggressive. Extortion is a huge issue in my riding, and I hear constantly of cases from my constituents. Small business owners are being targeted, especially through WhatsApp. They are being threatened, intimidated and told to pay or face consequences. These are people who have worked hard to build something and are being forced to live in fear. When they look at the justice system, they are not looking for symbolic restitution orders years down the line. They are asking for protection, for enforcement and for a system that actually stops the people causing the harm.”
“To access restitution, they would need to track expenses in detail, link those expenses to specific incidents, prepare documentation for court and participate in legal proceedings. That is more administration work, more time spent in courts and more sources diverted from frontline work. (1740) Most smaller organizations will not have the capacity to do such things. If they do go ahead with it, we go back to the issue of enforceability. Will they even get any money? Are the court resources used not overwhelmingly more expensive than the damages? Let us talk about this crime crisis briefly. It is a crisis we are dealing with right now in communities across the country, including Edmonton. In Edmonton, we are seeing the impact of crime and addiction every single day. We see rising drug use on the streets.”
“The courts are already under strain, dealing with delays, backlogs and increasing pressure on judges, prosecutors and defence counsel. The bill would add another layer of complexity at the sentencing stage. To determine restitution, courts would need detailed financial records, documentation of expenses, witnesses to establish those costs, arguments over whether those costs were caused by a specific offender and so on. What would this really mean? It would mean more time, more paperwork and more delay. The result would be a system that moves even slower at a time when Canadians are already losing confidence in it. There would also be a practical burden falling on the organizations this bill is supposed to help.”
“These are not simple questions and in many cases they cannot be answered in a way that meets required legal standards. If it cannot be proven, then this bill simply will not deliver. The second problem is enforceability. Let us say the courts do establish causation. There is the question of whether the money can even be collected. The reality is the vast majority of offenders pertaining to this bill would not have the means to pay, with no assets, no steady incomes and likely facing significant sentences. What would happen? Courts would issue restitution that exists on paper, but not in reality, not collected, not enforced and providing no meaningful support to those community organizations. We would be left with only the illusion of accountability. The third issue is the impact on our justice system.”
“If crime creates costs, offenders should help pay the cost. However, as someone who practised law before coming to this House, I understand that just because something sounds good, it does not always work in practice. Unfortunately, I do not believe this bill would work in practice. The first fundamental problem is causation. We cannot just point to a harm and say who should pay. The basic legal standard is it must be proven that a specific individual caused a specific loss. This bill would be asking the courts to do something extremely difficult: to take broad system-wide costs, like shelter demand and harm reduction services, and tie them to a single offender; to decide which dealer caused the overdose that required opioid overdose reversals like Narcan; or to decide which individual caused the need for shelter security upgrades.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on Bill C-238 , a bill that attempts to address a very real and serious issue in our country, the issue of growing crime in our communities. Let me be clear. The intent behind this bill is understandable. Across Canada, frontline organizations are carrying an enormous burden, shelters are overwhelmed, hospitals are dealing with constant overdose cases, first responders are stretched thin and victim support organizations are under pressure like never before. These are the people who show up when everything is falling apart, and they are paying a price for crime. The bill is attempting to respond to this reality by allowing courts to order offenders involved in human and drug trafficking to pay restitution to community organizations. On its face, this is reasonable.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of all struggling Canadians, especially those in Edmonton. The cost of living crisis is affecting millions of Canadians and thousands of my constituents. The residents are describing visiting grocery stores as an increasing financial burden, something Conservatives have reminded the government about for a year. Many Canadians are having to make difficult decisions on whether to buy fresh produce or skip meals. This petition calls upon the government to repeal all taxes that directly affect food production and the supply chain, such as the carbon tax and fertilizer tax. Canadians, Edmontonians and their wallets deserve a break.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of Edmontonians and residents of Edmonton Southeast with regard to the rising housing crisis. As the cost of homes skyrockets, the dream of home ownership for many Canadians is slipping away. These residents describe out-of-control rent prices, while the lack of supply increases the price of new homes. This petition, therefore, calls upon the government to cut bureaucracy, cut the GST on new homes under $1.3 million, work with municipalities to create more affordable homes for all generations of Canadians and let the dream of home ownership be a reality for Canadians who are left out under the Liberal government.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have a few petitions to present today. I rise to present a petition on behalf of the people of Edmonton Southeast. Edmontonians do not feel safe in their homes or on the street. They note that little is being done to combat increasing crime, social disorder and extortion within the communities of Edmonton. However, hard-working Canadians deserve safe neighbourhoods and strong laws. The petitioners call upon the government to bring home safe streets by repealing all Liberal soft-on-crime laws and bringing back mandatory minimum sentencing for violent offenders.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are supporting the bill, as I said in my speech, with great displeasure. We know that the bill needs further amendments, and we know that there is room for further ratification that needs to be done. I look forward to the Liberal government's making sure that the agreement, when it comes into effect, is balanced for both the U.K. and Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, that was a wonderful question. My take on the Liberals' stand of adding bureaucracy is that it gives them more airtime to make statements and slogans. If there is less bureaucracy, then time has to be spent on actual results. When we cannot get results, all we have to rely upon are slogans and statements.”
“Mr. Speaker, we know that the member opposite is famous for twisting myths around to sound like they are real. I said that during Stephen Harper's time, we signed 15 trade agreements with 51 countries. That is a fact. The member does not have anything to refer to saying that my information is incorrect or is not well informed, so I encourage him to come up with the facts and the sources he is relying upon.”
“This is a bad negotiation strategy and goes to show what we already know, which is that the Prime Minister does not care about farmers, he does not care about the beef industry and he does not care about Alberta. Conservatives will support the expansion of our trade market, but it is with great displeasure that beef producers and, in turn, Albertans were not taken into account. Otherwise, the U.K. has and will continue to be a close partner for Canada. Our history is intertwined. Our country, our values and our democracy, including this very House of Commons, come from the U.K. It is good for both countries to maintain their ties and open market at a fair level.”
“In fact, the U.K.'s position is anti-scientific. Canadian food, especially Alberta beef, is some of the best quality in the world, and the vast majority of countries recognize our standards as world-class. The U.K. is using non-tariff barriers to keep Canadians out of its market, but at the same time, we let it into ours. That is not fair, and that is why the Canadian Cattle Association has called for the termination of the Canada-UK Trade Continuity Agreement previously. The Liberals have failed beef producers and Albertans by not standing up on this trade irritant. Instead, they expect us to approve the U.K.'s accession to the CPTPP without anything in return.”
“The United Kingdom exported over 16 million dollars' worth of beef to Canada in 2023, over $42 million in 2024 and $28 million in 2025. Meanwhile, Canada exported only $85,500 dollars' worth of beef to the U.K. in 2023, $25,000 in 2024 and no beef at all in 2025. How can this be, given that Canada is one of the largest beef producers in the world, with the best quality of meat and world-class safety standards? This comes at a time when beef exports are doing well. In 2024, Canada exported $3.88 billion in beef, with Alberta exporting $3.8 billion, almost all of it. The reason we have no exports to the United Kingdom is that it refuses to approve the carcass washing applied at Canadian slaughter plants and opposes the use of growth promotants in beef production. These objections are not based in fact.”
“Imagine kids going to school with no food. This affects their mental health, not just their stomachs. How sad is it that we now live in a country where working families are forced to use food banks? This goes to show what 10 years of Liberals have done to this country. With the current failure to keep jobs in Canada, things may only get worse. Every plant moving to the U.S. or shutting down due to lack of market access means more and more families will have to turn to food banks to keep their stomachs full. (1700) With regard to this legislation, where we are approving the necessary legislative changes for the U.K. to join the CPTPP, there is a major sector that the Liberals fail to defend, and that is the beef industry, an important industry for Canadians and Albertans.”
“I think we can all see the writing on the wall, that the current Liberal government may fail us just as they have in the past, and Liberal failures are having a real impact on Canadians. I look at the Food Banks Canada “Hunger Count 2025” report. The results are sad, but unfortunately, unsurprising. Canada is becoming a country where hunger is normalized. Food prices have risen 25% in the last four years, and the month of March saw over two million food bank visits. This is the highest ever in Canadian history. I recently attended an event in my riding, hosted by Infinity Safety Awareness and organized by Sunil Phool. We discussed the intersection of food insecurity and mental health. I met with students, single parents and many suffering from this insecurity. I learned how much this affects families and children.”
“The Prime Minister promised to negotiate a win by July 21 last year. We are now well into 2026, and there is no deal. On August 1, President Trump's government raised tariffs to 35% on Canadian goods not covered by CUSMA. That was a great job, Prime Minister. The free trade uncertainty is far from over as the government prepares for the July 1, 2026 CUSMA review. Even the Prime Minister has expressed uncertainty, expressing that Canada may need to change the terms for U.S. access to our market if the negotiations fail. This is our biggest trading partner, but the Prime Minister has yet to establish respect from Americans, flip-flopping on our commitments to them and even recently being called governor in a social media post by the President.”
“That benefits us in the global economy. It helps Canada to be the global leader it is in many industries and sectors. The Conservative Party has a strong legacy in promoting free trade. It was the old PCs under Mulroney who created NAFTA, leading to free trade in North America. Later on, former Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper may have been the greatest proponent of international trade in Canadian history. Under his Conservative government, Canada concluded 15 free trade agreements with 51 countries, giving Canada preferential access across the world. The CPTPP, the very trade agreement we are discussing, also fits into the Harper legacy. His legacy put Canada in a strong position globally, one that, unfortunately, the Liberal government has squandered, namely with the United States.”