Andrew Scheer
Regina—Qu'Appelle, Saskatchewan · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I offer my sincere thanks to my colleagues for that accommodation. I think that any time a member is retiring after great service to their constituents in this House, it is appropriate that we show that kind of grace. I want to quickly extend all the very best to my colleague from Yorkton—Melville .”
“Mr. Speaker, I have a quick point of order. I hate to interrupt the hon. member's speech. Our ridings share a border, and so we are neighbouring members of Parliament. My riding goes all the way to Melville where her riding begins.”
“They want to see people elected to the House of Commons who do not just go with the flow or read the polls and make decisions afterwards, but have a clear sense of who they are and what they are all about.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition, signed by over 215 residents in and around the Indian Head area who are protesting the closure of the Indian Head Research Farm. This research facility has over 100 years of data on soil, moisture and crop varieties.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am tabling yet another petition from residents in and around the Indian Head area in southern Saskatchewan who are urging the government to reverse its terrible decision to shut down the Indian Head agricultural research farm.”
“Mr. Speaker, we have all been waiting since last Thursday for today's Thursday question, the time of the week when Canadian telecom providers have to scramble to add excess capacity as hundreds of thousands of Canadians tune in, anxiously anticipating what the government will bring forward in the chamber for the rest of this week and into…”
The complete record
Every one of 243 lines we hold for Andrew Scheer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 5.
“Mr. Speaker, I fear that my counterpart on the government bench has missed his calling to be a speech writer in the politburo, because so many of the things he said there directly contradicted what he had been saying. For example, he said that this is all being done in a spirit of collaboration. However, with the motion, the Liberals would literally be taking away the need to collaborate, by giving themselves a majority. Another falsehood the member stated was that there are not two tiers in committees, yet he referenced the fact that the three oversight committees are in fact chaired by the opposition. That is a different tier of committee. Those committees have always been treated differently by the Standing Orders and by the usual practices of the House, precisely because they are a different sort of committee.”
“Mr. Speaker, because the government House leader referenced it, I understand he has just made a commitment that he would allow us to bring that document into the House and accept its tabling. I will take him up on that and make sure we get him that list. I do hope he will not just provide unanimous consent to the tabling of that document but that he also gives it to the Minister of Finance so that we can finally get the Liberals to stop causing the inflation that is causing so much hardship for Canadians.”
“The two Liberal anti-development bills from the Trudeau era, the “no more pipelines” bill and the “no new development” bill, are blocking investment into Canada. Will the government finally repeal those antidevelopment laws that are contributing to the weakening Canadian dollar and helping drive up prices?”
“Mr. Speaker, now it is time for everyone's favourite part of the parliamentary calendar, the Thursday question. I was hoping the government House leader could update the House as to the business for the remainder of this week and into next week. Specifically, on the heels of recent data showing that Canada once again under the Liberal Prime Minister has the highest food inflation in the entire G7, can we expect any legislation to provide relief at the grocery store? We would be willing to fast-track legislation that would go the full way to lifting federal taxes off gasoline and diesel, should the government want to introduce that legislation as well. One thing that strengthens a dollar and protects currency against devaluation is investors trying to put money into our country.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are are in favour of lowering taxes and prices and fighting Liberal inflation. That is what Conservatives are all about. Maybe Liberals believe times are not so bad because their friends around boardroom tables have never had it so good. Lobbyists and consultants are raking it in. Meanwhile, since 2015, visits to food banks in Canada are up 77%. Food prices are up 42% since 2015, and just this week, the newest data confirms food inflation continues to be the highest in the G7, and overall inflation had the worst one-month jump in over a year. If the Prime Minister still does not believe that grocery prices are rising, maybe he could ask the guy who buys his strawberries for him.”
“Mr. Speaker, we cannot solve a problem if we deny that it exists. The Prime Minister rejects the fact that Canadians are struggling. He said, “Affordability is the best it has been in...a decade.” Yesterday, he doubled down. Let us take a look at the facts. Rent for a one-bedroom unit has doubled since 2015. The typical Canadian house is up 51%, and in fact, over the last 10 years, housing prices have outpaced incomes in Canada by 29%, which is the worst drop in affordability in the entire G7. Now that he has had time to learn the facts, is he going to keep telling Canadians that their struggles are all in their imagination?”
“Mr. Speaker, I have here a petition signed by dozens and dozens of residents near Indian Head, Saskatchewan. As members may know, the Liberal government has decided to cancel the funding for the agricultural research centre located at Indian Head. This facility does world-class research into crop development, drought resistance and pest resistance. Unfortunately, the Liberal government has decided to close this facility and a number of other research centres across the country. The petitioners point out the good work that this centre does to help improve agricultural commodities and the benefits it has to the agricultural and agri-food sectors. They are calling on the government to reverse the cold-hearted and anti-science decision to close this research facility.”
“It also means there are fewer jobs and opportunities for Canadians and less revenue for government to invest in core services. Will the government be bringing in any kind of legislation to undo the bad Liberal laws that chased away that investment, such as repealing the “no more pipelines” bill, the “leave it in the ground” bill and the shipping ban off the coast of western Canada? If the government was going to announce today that it would be undoing the terrible decisions of the last 10 years of Liberal rule, Conservatives would do everything we could to quickly pass those pieces of legislation.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is the time of the week when I am told CPAC has to have extra server capacity on standby for the surge of attention to the chamber's proceedings. However, it being Thursday, it is time for the update from the government on the business for the rest of this week and into next. I was hoping the government could address a shocking report that came out this week that $1 trillion of investment has fled Canada since 2015. Now, something happened in 2015: The Liberals took office. Ever since then, there has been a flight of capital from our country. RBC today calculates that at $1 trillion. That is a trillion dollars' worth of investment leaving our country and weakening our dollar. This means it takes more dollars to buy the same amount of goods.”
“Mr. Speaker, good times are almost here, just a little over the horizon, but right now there are no smiles on motorists' faces, because they were expecting 100% relief at the pumps. Under the Liberal government's plan, the government will still continue to collect windfall taxes, and hard-working Canadians will have to pay more at the pumps. The Liberal government is keeping the GST on fuel and the fuel standard tax, which alone adds seven cents a litre. It is providing only a third of the relief for a third of the year. We do not give a pharmacist a high-five when he gives us only one third of our prescription. Why not just go all the way and reduce, scrap and eliminate 100% of fuel taxes for the—”
“Mr. Speaker, after weeks of Conservative pressure, the Liberals finally admitted that their high fuel taxes are hammering Canadians at the pumps, but, in typical Liberal fashion, this Prime Minister has proven to be just another Liberal, keeping more windfall taxes for government than for providing relief for Canadians. The Liberal announcement today is simply not good enough. It is going to provide only a third of the relief for a third of the year. The Conservative plan is to scrap 100% of federal fuel taxes for the entire rest of the year. If the Liberals are going to admit that the Conservatives were right all along, why not just go all the way and adopt our full plan?”
“However, before we break, I would like the government to give us an update as to what we will be dealing with when we come back after those two constituency work weeks and whether or not there will be any legislation introduced in the House to repeal the industrial carbon tax, which is driving out investment in Canada's energy sector and contributing to the collapse in the fall of the Canadian dollar, which is, of course, a big culprit in the rising prices that Canada faces.”
“Mr. Speaker, it being Thursday, it is time for the Thursday question. Before we go back to our constituencies to engage in important constituency work and to spend time with our friends and family over the Easter break, I want to wish everybody across Canada a very blessed and meaningful Good Friday. Of course, I am looking forward to the wonderful news of our Lord's resurrection on Easter Sunday, something that brings Canadians together from coast to coast, from all different cultures and backgrounds.”
“Mr. Speaker, even the Liberal Prime Minister acknowledged, “one thing impacting...food prices is the fall in the Canadian dollar”, but it is his job to give us a strong dollar. He has chosen to keep his industrial carbon tax that drives investment out of Canada. This is not the first time he has racked up a record like this. His tenure in the U.K. was described as, “characterised by stagnant growth, stalled living standards, and declining productivity”. Does this sound familiar? The Liberal Prime Minister is great at getting important jobs, but is just terrible at actually doing those jobs. Will he reverse his radical environmental agenda so our dollar can be strong and food can become more affordable?”
“Mr. Speaker, it used to be that when oil prices went up, the Canadian dollar went up along with them, but it is not. Why is this? It is because the government is attacking our energy industry. Its industrial carbon tax drives investment out of the energy sector, and despite massive new powers, it has still gotten no new pipelines built. Even the Liberal Prime Minister has said when our dollar is weak, food becomes more expensive, but he does not realize that it is his job to give Canadians a strong dollar. Liberals never change. Will the Prime Minister reverse his radical environmental agenda so our dollar can be strong and Canadians can eat, heat and house themselves?”
“Under this Liberal Prime Minister 's government, under his policies, Canada has the highest food inflation because it has the worst domestic economic policy. The parliamentary secretary talked about the fuel standards, and their not mandating an increase, but the effect of the policies will be that increase. It is going to be 17¢ a litre. Canadians cannot afford that. Farmers cannot afford that. That is going to add to price increases.”
“Mr. Speaker, there is so much wrong with what that member just said. I wish I had more time. First of all, this grocery rebate was the exact same policy that the Justin Trudeau Liberals tried. It failed because when the government creates more money, when it borrows more money to give out on the demand side, it causes more inflation. It is monetary policy that causes inflation, not global factors. Inflation is not like the weather. It is not something that just happens because of natural phenomena. It is because of domestic policies, including deficit spending bankrolled by the creation of money. Do not take my word for it. This is exactly what happened in the previous Liberal government. It is what is going to happen today. The proof of that is the fact that every other country in the G7 is also facing those global factors.”
“He believes in the radical, most extreme form of net zero, which would leave our natural resources in the ground. He actually said in an interview with the media that the best course of action for Canada is to leave up to 50% of our natural resources in the ground. Why will the government not finish the job and eliminate the industrial carbon tax so that Canadians do not have to pay this useless tax on the consumer side or the industrial side?”
“He actually said in an interview that the right way to do it was to take it off of the receipts that Canadians had to pay and bury it on the back end. He literally said that we need, in effect, a shadow carbon tax, and that is exactly what he has done. He wrote that book Values , and I reference that book for a reason. If I had written a book called “Values” where I defined myself as a human being on almost a moral level and professed my love of a carbon tax and my desire to leave oil and gas in the ground, when I decided to run for politics, people might not believe me if I suddenly claimed to have had a conversion and disavowed everything I had ever written. The Liberal Prime Minister does not want to develop our natural resources.”
“On April 1, when that jumps to $110 a tonne, that represents almost a threefold increase to the industrial carbon tax from just a few years ago. I said that the industrial carbon tax was lurking in the shadows, and I use the word “shadow” for a very specific reason. It is because the Liberal Prime Minister , before he ran for Liberal leader, was often out on the world stage saying the problem with the carbon tax was that people noticed it. He actually said this over and over again in interviews, on panels and in his book Values: Building a Better World for All . He said that the consumer carbon tax was divisive and that people saw it when they filled up their cars with gas and when they paid their utility bills, so his solution was to hide it.”
“Every farmer who buys fertilizer and equipment, who has to pay for fuel to haul back and forth between the grain elevator and the terminal or who picks up supplies and inputs as we enter the growing season, has to pay that carbon tax. All of that gets passed on to consumers. The truckers who have to transport goods from the processing centres to the distributors have to pay that carbon tax. In fact, when the industrial carbon tax was set at $40 a tonne, just a few years ago, studies showed that the effect of that on a Toronto to Montreal food haul added about $2,000 a year to the cost of just the trucking. That does not include any of the processing or energy costs that those companies involved in making or processing food pay. That is just the transportation alone, and that was at $40 a tonne.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a little over a week before another terrible April Fool's trick by the Liberal Prime Minister will be played on Canadians. The illusion that he would like everyone in Canada to believe is that the carbon tax is dead and buried, but what the Liberal Prime Minister is not coming clean with Canadians on, and what he does not like to talk about, is the fact that the industrial carbon tax is still lurking behind the shadows, and on April 1, that carbon tax is set to go up to $110 a tonne. Right now, it is about $95 a tonne. That is almost a 16% increase. That industrial carbon tax trickles down to consumers in so many different ways. Every company in Canada that produces something, and every company, business and factory that uses energy, has to pay that carbon tax. Those costs get passed down to consumers.”
“Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations, so I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: Motion That, notwithstanding any Standing Order, Special Order or usual practice of the House, in relation to the report stage of Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda, hate crime and access to religious or cultural places), Motion No. 1, standing in the names of the Members for Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, Brampton West and Elgin—St. Thomas—London South on today's Notice Paper, be replaced with the following: “That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting the Short Title.””
“I also wonder if he could update the House as to whether the Liberals are going to repeal any of the hidden taxes that add to the cost of groceries, like the industrial carbon tax and the fuel standard tax, which adds seven cents a litre and is rising to 17¢ a litre. In this affordability crisis that the Liberals have caused, will they at least bring in some legislation to provide relief at the grocery store for hard-working Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is time for the Thursday question, the day on which all of CPAC's servers experience a massive spike. We hope its IT department is well prepped for what is about to happen. I wonder if the government House leader could update the House as to the business in the chamber for the rest of this week and the week after our constituency work week. I am especially curious to hear whether he is going to be tabling any kind of action plan to not just ban new IRGC agents from entering the country but deport the ones who are in this country, who are causing so much harm to Canadian citizens and security and, of course, funding a terrible regime in Iran.”
“Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. As for the G7, under the Liberal Prime Minister , Canada now has the worst food price inflation and the only economy that is shrinking. All of this has gotten worse since he became Prime Minister. Instead of helping lower prices by cancelling Liberal taxes, he is driving them even higher. When companies that process, transport, store or sell food pay more, who does he think all those costs get passed on to? We cannot control what happens in other countries, but we can absolutely control whether to drive prices higher with tax increases. Why not at least give Canadians a break from Liberal taxes and cancel the fuel standard tax and the industrial carbon tax?”
“Mr. Speaker, we cannot control what happens abroad, but the Liberals do control the policies they are imposing that make life more expensive, like the Liberal fuel standard. This is effectively another kind of carbon tax, which adds seven cents a litre and will rise to 17¢ a litre, meaning more costs for drivers, farmers, fishermen and those who transport our food. The Liberal Prime Minister is also hiking the industrial carbon tax on steel, aluminum, plastic and farm equipment. These costs are imposed at home, not abroad, and paid for by Canadians. When will the Liberals accept responsibility for what they can control and cancel their policies that make life more expensive for Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, if they had confidence in the immigration minister , then she would be answering these questions herself. Let us take a look at another case. Joyson Lewis assaulted his girlfriend. He grabbed her, tearing her shirt in the process, threw her to the ground and hit her again. The judge in the case sentenced this foreign criminal to nine months of probation specifically so that the conviction would not be entered into the record and he could stay in Canada. Why is the Liberal government doubling down on a policy that gives sentencing discounts to foreign criminals, and when will the Prime Minister fire the minister ?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government has created a sentencing discount system for foreign criminals. The Prime Minister claims that they have the system under control. Let us look at the case of Rajbir Singh. This criminal sexually assaulted a young woman and received a conditional discharge so he would not have a criminal conviction registered against him so he could stay in the country. Under the Liberal Prime Minister 's sentencing discount policy, not only are dangerous criminals allowed to stay in the country, but they get released early. When will the Prime Minister fire his immigration minister , or does he think that she has it all under control?”
“Mr. Speaker, the government's own data shows that building bureaucracy does not actually get results. The Liberals also have it backward with respect to the auto sector. Over the last 10 years of the Liberal government, the number of vehicles produced in Canada has fallen from 2.3 million cars to 1.2 million. Their plan is to force working Canadians to send their tax dollars to subsidize the purchase of EVs that most Canadians cannot afford, and the vast majority of those EVs sold in Canada are not made in Canada. That means some of the biggest winners of this subsidy program are American auto workers. Instead of forcing Canadian workers to subsidize foreign-made vehicles, why do they not adopt the Conservative plan and remove the GST on all new vehicles in Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Canadian dream of home ownership is fading for too many young Canadians. Despite lots of announcements, the actual results from the Liberal housing plan are downright depressing. Home ownership among 30- to 34-year-olds has fallen to 52%, and new home sales are down 45% in the GTA and 56% in Vancouver. In fact, the government's own housing agency is predicting that new home starts will fall, not increase, by more than 18% for the next three years. It is clear that more bureaucracy is not the answer. When will the government adopt the Conservative plan to kick-start homebuilding by removing the GST on all new homes and restore the dream of home ownership for young Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the official opposition, I would like to reiterate the messages of condolence and support from the House to the victims who are still fighting for their lives, for those whose lives were cut short and their families, and for the community still reeling from the senseless shooting in Tumbler Ridge, B.C. (1420) Can the minister update the House as to the support being provided and share any news that would be appropriate as this investigation proceeds?”
“I wonder if we will see legislation on that rather than a complicated rebate scheme that will see Canadian tax dollars go to subsidize the purchase of foreign-built EVs, and if we can expect any legislation that would include the Conservative idea of getting rid of the GST on all Canadian-produced vehicles. Those are the types of concrete measures that would not only lower the cost of living for Canadians but also help build our economy. Will the government take us up on that offer as we extend our hands across the way for common-sense solutions, or will it once again double down on failed policies of the past?”
“Mr. Speaker, I believe CPAC refers to this moment as the crown jewel of its weekly programming. Because it is Thursday, I am wondering if the government House leader can update the House as to the business for the rest of this week and into the next week. I wonder specifically if the government has had the time to analyze and absorb the Conservative leader 's letter calling for concrete, common-sense proposals to not only deal with the cost of living crisis but also strengthen Canada's position against things like unfair tariffs, ideas like getting rid of the capital gains tax on investments that are reinvested in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are not maintaining; they are cutting and shutting. Workers at the Indian Head agricultural research farm are the latest to lose their jobs, thanks to the Liberal government. This research centre provides cutting-edge innovation on soil management, crop varieties, and disease and pest resiliency. It provides jobs for Canadian scientists and improves Canadian crop production to the benefit of Canadian farmers. Meanwhile, the Liberals have sent hundreds of millions of Canadian tax dollars overseas for stupid, ideologically driven pet projects like $8 million for gender-just rice farming in Vietnam. Instead of closing Canadian research centres that benefit Canadians, why not stop the phony foreign aid projects?”
“Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among the various party House leaders, and I believe, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: Motion That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practices of this House, Bill C-223, An Act to amend the Divorce Act, shall be deemed to have been read a second time on division and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.”
“They are there to provide some structure and some order. I hope we do not get too bogged down in rules for the sake of rules but accept the spirit of the rules that are there. The hon. member's suggestion is very valid. The House leaders and whips do our very best to make sure that our members respect the rules. Every once in a while there are mistakes, and usually there is grace afforded members from all parties and all caucuses. I suggest we take these conversations off-line.”
“Mr. Speaker, of course it is not usually a practice to debate a Speaker's ruling once it has been delivered, but here we are. I would just maybe offer a couple of thoughts. The most important thing is that members are able to vote. We would hate to have a situation where constituents of a given riding do not have their representative pronounce on a bill or a motion, because of a technicality. The rules around decorum are there as an assistance to the Chair and to the Table. We can imagine the chaos if MPs were walking around, milling around, putting their hand up or having their name called out as they were moving around the table. Therefore the rules are there to preserve decorum so votes can be orderly. Those rules are not there for the same reasons that, in the NFL, if a toe touches the white line then it is not a touchdown.”
“Mr. Speaker, the plan did not work for Justin Trudeau. I do not know why the Liberals think it will work today. Earlier today, the Prime Minister tried to blame inflation on global factors, but all other countries in the G7 have lower food inflation than Canada. The Liberal fuel standards tax did not invade us from another country. It already adds 7¢ a litre and is set to rise to 17¢. The Liberal industrial carbon tax did not come from away either. Working families who cannot afford beef know that today's announcement will not even cover one trip to the grocery store. Why will the Liberals not stop trying to recycle failed Trudeau policies and adopt common-sense Conservative measures to scrap Liberal taxes on food?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister asked to be judged on inflation on grocery prices. Food inflation has doubled to the highest in the G7 and is double the U.S. rate. This is a homegrown problem of high Liberal taxes on farmers, fertilizer and food processors, and rampant inflationary deficits. Today's recycled Trudeau-era rebate will barely cover one trip to the store for the average family. They now need to spend over $17,000 a year on groceries. It did not work when Trudeau tried it; prices kept rising. There is nothing in today's announcement that will make anything cost less. Instead of temporary measures, why not permanently scrap the Liberal hidden taxes that drive up food costs?”
“Mr. Speaker, voting against the Prime Minister 's own MOU does not a pipeline build. Getting that MOU through his own caucus should have been the easy part of the process. This self-declared master negotiator could not even do that. Instead, his MOU piles on new conditions and red tape, ties approvals to other projects, hikes the industrial carbon tax and hands unconstitutional vetoes to other levels of government. It is clear he could not even get it through his own caucus. If the Prime Minister could not do that, why should Canadians believe he can get a pipeline through all his new hoops and hurdles?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a problem. A pipeline to the Pacific is very popular with Canadians. Canadians want to stop the practice of selling Canadian oil at a massive discount to the United States when billions of customers lie just on the other side of the Pacific Ocean, but the Prime Minister has never believed in selling more Canadian energy. He wrote an entire book about leaving Canada's natural resources in the ground. He cheered on the decision to cancel the northern gateway pipeline, and his caucus does not support one either. Is the real reason he voted against his own MOU yesterday that he has no intention of actually getting a pipeline built? He just needs to pretend long enough, until the next election.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is every CPAC viewer's favourite day of the week, Thursday, when we have the Thursday question. I would like to ask the government House leader if he can inform the House what we will be dealing with for the rest of this week and into next week. Instead of a flashy MOU that has a carbon tax hike with no guarantee of a pipeline, will the Liberals bring in legislation to repeal the anti-energy laws that have kept the oil and gas in the ground and made Canada so dependent on the United States, or will they continue their habit of sending subsidized energy to the U.S. to fund the U.S. economy instead of the Canadian economy?”
“Mr. Speaker, it does not matter how many signatures they put on that MOU if they give a giant veto stamp to the British Columbian premier. Instead of just repealing all the Liberal leave-it-in-the-ground laws that killed energy projects, the Prime Minister has just unveiled a new process that is designed to fail. He is giving an unconstitutional veto to the B.C. premier. He is forcing Albertans to pay billions of dollars to put air into the ground, and now he is hiking the industrial carbon tax. Every time the Liberals hike those carbon taxes, everything gets more expensive. Why is the government forcing through a massive hike to the carbon tax instead of just getting out of the way?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals killed the northern gateway pipeline project, making Canada more dependent on the U.S. Now, the Prime Minister is putting on a big show, but he is setting up another process for a pipeline to fail, with new hurdles and hoops and, worst of all, a massive increase to the industrial carbon tax. The proposed pipeline is never going to happen, because the Prime Minister is giving a veto to the B.C. premier. What is guaranteed to happen after April 1 is that Albertans will pay a very real and very massive hike in the industrial carbon tax. Why is the Prime Minister more intent on hiking carbon taxes instead of building pipelines?”
“Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, I just point out that there are many instances where we have asked the government to grant take-note debates on an emergency basis for very important topics, and it is the government that says no to those. Only the government can grant an emergency take-note debate, and that is something the government has repeatedly denied.”
“The opposition has now been asking for weeks for an emergency take-note debate on the trade impacts of the government's failures to get tariffs lifted, specifically on softwood lumber. We have proposed holding a take-note debate next week. I wonder if the government will accept that request, listen to the thousands of Canadian workers who have lost their jobs because of the devastation that has affected the softwood lumber industry and grant that emergency take-note debate for sometime next week.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is time for everyone's favourite part of the parliamentary cycle, the Thursday question. I was wondering if the government could inform the House of the business for the rest of this week and into next week. I have a couple of quick questions about the agenda. There has been a lot of talk about a proposed pipeline through British Columbia to the west coast. Of course, that would be useless if the Liberal shipping ban stays in place. Lifting that ban will require legislation. Does the government intend to bring in legislation to end that double-standard law that prevents Canadian ships from transporting Canadian energy but allows U.S. tankers to travel through the same area?”
“Mr. Speaker, again, after 10 years, we are just on the cusp of things all coming together, but I can answer the question the minister did not answer himself. The answer is no. While the Liberals have made it illegal for Canadian companies to load Canadian ships with Canadian oil, U.S. tankers can continue to travel off B.C.'s coast and take their oil to countries around the world. As we speak, the U.S. crude oil tanker California is travelling from Tacoma to Alaska along the west coast. Why are the Liberals keeping in a law that prevents Canada from exporting our oil while U.S. tankers travel through the exact same place?”
“Mr. Speaker, that is typically Liberal: Things are always just about to start getting better. Meanwhile, actual tariffs keep going up. One way to increase trade with other countries would be with a pipeline to British Columbia's west coast, but the Liberals killed northern gateway in 2016, resulting in billions in lost opportunities for Canadian workers and businesses. Now there is talk of reviving that pipeline, but of course, if the shipping ban stays in place, no one will be able to export what comes through the pipe. The Liberals made it illegal to ship Canadian energy off Canada's west coast. Does that law also ban U.S. tankers from travelling through the same area?”