Kevin Lamoureux
Winnipeg North, Manitoba · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, when we take a look at this particular legislation, or any other piece of legislation or budgetary measures that the government has brought in since the last election, when Canadians elected a new Prime Minister and a new government, we will find that listening to Canadians is the top priority.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want the member to recognize the degree to which the Conservative Party always wants to talk down the economy. It brings me to yesterday, when we found out that the Prime Minister went to the G7 and that 13 new deals were signed off, with countries such as Japan, Italy, Denmark, France, Germany, Netherlands and Portugal, fi…”
“Mr. Speaker, since the last election, just over a year ago, when Canadians voted for our current Prime Minister and a new government, we have been listening to the people of Canada. Members will see that listening in every aspect of our legislative agenda and our budgetary measures.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on my friend's comment that we live in the real world. The real world is looking pretty good in terms of where Canada has been since the last federal election. We have a Prime Minister who has been out and about, attracting literally billions of dollars in commitments of investment.”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciated to a certain degree the member's comments when he made reference to the issue of the process. However, I would ask him to realize that, over the years, things have changed considerably. We saw time allocation used during Stephen Harper's government a record number of times.”
“Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling a petition from a number of individuals. Actually, over 1,000 people have signed the petition. The petitioners are looking for a sense, from both the provincial Government of Manitoba and Ottawa, of working together to try to come up with a solution to deal with Manitoba's unique situation related to our wo…”
The complete record
Every one of 3,647 lines we hold for Kevin Lamoureux, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 73.
“Mr. Speaker, I must admit I am a bit surprised by the leader of the Green Party sending possible mixed messages for the first time on the issue, so I would like to get some clarification. When she talks about Canada becoming self-sufficient in terms of oil and gas supply, I am sure she is aware that one of the issues is that Atlantic Canada imports a lot of oil because we do not have the pipeline infrastructure to take the product from the Prairies into Atlantic Canada. Is she trying to imply that maybe that is something we should be considering? How do we resolve the issue that she has highlighted, in terms of Canada becoming more self-sufficient in consuming the gas we actually produce? To that end, does she also support increasing refining capacity in Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, Conservative after Conservative has stood up and talked about the issue of affordability. We have brought forward affordability measures, such as the groceries and essentials benefit for Canadians, which is coming out in June. There will be substantial amounts of money for the 11 million Canadians who will benefit by it. The Prime Minister committed to and got rid of the carbon tax on gasoline. There was the fuel excise tax we took off the price of gas effective April 1 and going to Labour Day weekend. There is the national school food program we have instituted in schools. The Conservatives always vote against these things. Can the member explain why, if the Conservatives care about affordability, they vote against Liberal initiatives to—”
“Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: Motion That, in relation to the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees and Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors Annual Conference, six members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to travel to Halifax, Nova Scotia, in the summer of 2026, during an adjournment period, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.”
“In response, the government intends to propose an amendment to Bill C-30 at the earliest opportunity, to remedy this issue and to ensure that the fuel tax relief applies to leaded aviation gasoline.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order regarding Bill C-30 , the spring economic update 2026 implementation act. I would like to notify the House of a technical issue in clause 11. That clause of Bill C-30 proposes amendments to temporarily set the federal fuel excise tax rate to zero for gasoline, unleaded aviation gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel. A reference to leaded aviation gasoline was, however, not included in the proposed amendments in that clause. As announced by the Prime Minister on April 14, 2026, the temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax is intended to apply to aviation fuels generally during the relief period. Therefore, it is the government's intention that the proposed amendments apply for all fuels used in the aviation industry, including leaded aviation gasoline.”
“Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the member could acknowledge the hypocrisy we see coming from the Conservative Party. On the one hand, Conservatives talk about the issue of affordability, yet when the government proposes initiatives like the Canada groceries and essentials benefit program, the Conservatives vote against it. When it comes to the national school food program, which, as has been pointed out by the government whip, is feeding hundreds of thousands of young children, the Conservatives vote against it. There are a number of measures that the government has taken to deal with the issue of affordability because we understand the need. However, the Conservatives continue to vote against those measures. Why the hypocrisy?”
“Mr. Speaker, we know the number of visits from Manitoba to the United States has actually decreased. The member made reference to the people in his constituency who are travelling to the United States in order to gas up. A quick search finds that the price of gas in Minnesota is about $1.55 a litre. That is probably within two cents or three cents of what I paid over the weekend. Does the member really believe there is a flood of people going from his constituency and travelling to Minneapolis in order to get gas?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that under this Prime Minister , we have seen a government that has recognized the value of building a strong Canada for all Canadians, to make it stronger and healthier. That is what those policies, as they have unfolded, have directed. We understand the importance of the economy, the environment and indigenous people, bringing them all together, knowing full well that we can work in collaboration and have a good environment, a good economy and better relations with indigenous people as we grow through things such as the major projects and export opportunities. It is an aggressive agenda that this Prime Minister and every Liberal member of Parliament has, to be there for Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, I was here when the current leader of the Conservative Party worked with Stephen Harper. They raised OAS eligibility from age 65 to 67, and they did absolutely nothing on the CPP file for over a decade. It took Liberal administrations to not only reverse the 65 to 67 but also get an increase to CPP. We have also had ongoing support in terms of increases to the GIS and the OAS for our seniors.”
“There are all sorts of ways we continue to support our seniors, not to mention the 10% increase for seniors 75 and above, those who rely more and more as they get older on medicine and so forth.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have had a great deal of sympathy for and have worked with seniors virtually since being elected back in 1988 for the first time in the Manitoba legislature. In fact, during the by-election back in 2010, I remember going to the German-Canadian Congress, where there were seniors telling me that they had to make a difficult decision in terms of medication versus food. It is a challenge of all governments. As a government, we have seen substantial supports for seniors, whether it is a record percentage of increases to the GIS, the ongoing inflation matches for things like OAS, supporting the new horizons for seniors program to the degree that we have, or one-time payments during times like the pandemic.”
“Mr. Speaker, like other G7 countries, in fact allied countries that the Government of Canada works with, we monitor the price of oil. It is important to recognize that it is a tangible, deliverable tax break that is being given from April 1, I believe, to Labour Day weekend because of the crisis in the Middle East. It is a responsible public policy that is there to provide support on the issue of affordability. It has already made a difference. If the member wants to get a better sense of it, he can talk to constituents who have to pay for gas. It is not just rich people who benefit from this. If he goes to the lineups and talks to the consumer, he will hear that consumers are benefiting today because of this policy. I believe that the Bloc should be onside and support the 10¢ excise tax relief being provided to all Canadians.”
“It might be a little offside with the leader of the Conservative Party , but they can stand up and recognize it as a program that is going to help their constituents on the issue of affordability. It is not much to ask for. Hopefully there is one Conservative who will recognize a good program when it hits them in face.”
“Mr. Speaker, my friend opposite has to stop drinking the right-wing Kool-Aid. I can assure people who are listening that everything I have said is factual and that I can support it. The issue with the national food program, as the member said, is that it is targeted at young children and not at every child who goes to school. I will concede that, but the Conservative Party does not even recognize the value of it or of any other program that is there to support Canadians on the affordability front. I am still waiting for Conservatives to stand up and say, “You know what? The groceries and essentials benefit program is good for Canadians. It will help in terms of the issue of affordability.” Just one Conservative should stand up.”
“There is an energy crisis. The Prime Minister , the government and, in fact, the entire Liberal caucus recognize that and the importance of the issue of affordability, and we are there to have the backs of Canadians.”
“We have extended and enhanced things such as the Canada child benefit, a program that serves millions of Canadians, upwards of around six million or so, I believe. We have reinforced the importance of things such as the Canadian dental program and pharmacare for diabetes, and some other measures, making sure that we are protecting, where we can, those social services. There are actions the government has taken, such as what I referenced at the very beginning: the grocery and essentials benefit program. I thought that program would receive unanimous support from the House of Commons. The money is going out in June. It deals with the affordability issue in part, just as the excise tax taken off gas until Labour Day by the government does. We have to put this in the context of what is taking place in the Middle East.”
“We understood, as a new government with a new Prime Minister, how important it was to take that action, and it was the very first action by the Prime Minister. There was another action within weeks of being back in session, prior to last summer. We made a substantial tax break for Canada's middle class. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, some Conservatives may try to belittle it, but 22 million Canadians benefited from that action. Mr. Speaker, you know, as I know, that this is the full truth. The member opposite should know it, because we debated the issue and forced the issue through prior to summer 2025. From it, 22 million Canadians benefited. We have eliminated the GST for first-time homebuyers. This is a substantial break for people who are trying to purchase a home for the first time.”
“That is why, unlike what the Conservatives are proposing, we have adopted a holistic approach to building a stronger, healthier economy, while at the same time being there and delivering for Canadians on the issue of affordability. This is not just something that we decided in the last day, 24 hours, or in the last week or month. This has been a commitment from our Prime Minister since day one. The issue of affordability and making life easier for Canadians has been there, top of mind, for the current government, and in particular for the Prime Minister, from day one. Just over a year ago, the first action taken by the Prime Minister reduced the price of gas substantially. It was the elimination of the carbon tax, and the government does see that as a positive initiative that made life more affordable for Canadians.”
“This comes straight from the far-right leadership of the Conservative Party today. I look at that and compare it to the types of questions I have put forward. I have had the opportunity to ask questions. There is a substantial difference between the policy measures that come from the Conservatives and those that come from the government of the day. The Conservatives are trying to divide. They are trying their hardest to anger the population, especially the far right. Is it any wonder there has been such a rise of, in a word, hatred, to a certain degree, toward politicians in general, because of things such as misinformation, gross exaggeration and things that are just not real? (1215) Mr. Speaker, do you really believe that there are seniors starving to death in Canada today? We understand and appreciate the issue of affordability.”
“That is no surprise if we listen to what the leader of the Conservative Party said in their caucus and on the floor of the House. We wonder why. It is more about trying to get Canadians angry. Yesterday in the House I was talking about how members of the Conservative Party go around Canada telling Canadians that Canada is broken, and how they try to justify that by throwing all sorts of numbers at them. However, I believe that if we were to canvass a vast majority of Canadians, we would find a sense of pride, a sense of wanting to collaborate, and at the very least the recognition that Canada is, from my perspective and I would argue that of most people, the best country in the world to call home, but we would never know that when listening to the Conservatives.”
“The next is from the same person, but in a different room, on the floor of the House of Commons: “extreme bloodshed and violence that Liberals have unleashed is what is radical.” These two quotes, one from the Conservative caucus and the other from the floor of the House of Commons, come from the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada . Let us talk about extreme. Yesterday we heard from the member for Oxford . It is amazing how the Conservatives say this stuff. He said, “seniors are now starving to death.” Seriously, do members think there are people who believe the Conservative right today, with the degree to which the Conservatives have gone so far to the right? It makes one wonder, because the member for Oxford is not alone. There have been other extreme statements made by the Conservatives.”
“Why, do members think, did we decrease the excise tax on gas? We recognize what is taking place in the Middle East, and it is having an impact that can be hard on the pocketbook of Canadians. That is why we delivered on the 10¢ tax break for gasoline. Let me give members a couple of quotes with respect to how the Conservative Party has moved to the right, and members can guess who might have said them. The first one is this: “There would be mass hunger and malnutrition with a tax this high.” I will let members guess who said that. It is from an address to the Conservative caucus.”
“Therefore, 50 litres of gas at that price would be $77.50. How does that price compare? The motion says we are paying 13% more than Americans. The Conservatives are telling my constituents that they are paying 13% more for gas than the Americans. The simple math tells me 50 litres of gas in California is going to cost my constituents $111, compared to getting it for $77.50. The point is we just cannot trust the Conservatives. (1210) If we look at the average price of gas in the United States we would find, at least based on the example in my experience of the last few days, that it is nowhere near what the Conservatives are purporting it to be today, but that does not stop them, because a part of their strategy, the far-right strategy, is to try to get the population angry. The government understands the important issue of affordability.”
“Let us say someone wants to fill up their tank in California. They will find that, after they apply the conversion, it is going to cost $111.13 to put in 50 litres of gas. I most often get my gas on Salter Avenue in the north end of Winnipeg at gas station 204. It is a great gas station. It consistently has some of the best prices, if not the best price in Winnipeg when it comes to gas. I believe I paid less than $1.60 over the weekend. I quickly called them. I asked, “What are you charging today for a litre of gas?” He said they cannot necessarily convey it over the telephone. I said that I believed it was $1.55 or something like that recently. It was less than that. I do not know for a fact, but members can try to phone them. It is the 204 gas company on Salter, just south of Selkirk Avenue.”
“One of my colleagues shared ChatGPT with me and I have been able to use it over the last little while. I took a look at some of the false claims the Conservatives make. I believe the motion says we pay 13% more for gas than the Americans do. I can say to the members opposite that I am not too sure where they get these numbers from, but it is an example of an extreme statement and it is what the far right likes to do. They like to say something even if it is not true. Let me give members a tangible example. California has 39 million people. Canada has 40 million people. I did a bit of research. It was not much, but I did do some on this issue. I found that a U.S.A. gallon equals about 3.785 litres. In California, it costs $6.10 a gallon, which equates to $1.61 a litre. That is in U.S. dollars.”
“The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance had a press conference announcing a program that I believe is going to be there into the future to assist middle- and low-income individuals with the affordability of groceries. I asked Conservative members if they would support that program and the response has been, in essence, no. Let us take a look at how that program, much like the GST did in the past, supported individuals who needed the support the most. The program is very much targeted. Over 10 million Canadians are going to benefit from the implementation of that program, which is going to be taking effect at the beginning of June. Again, we have to look at the contrast. The Conservatives like the flash and the extreme statements. I would like to give an example of both on this issue.”
“Other members of the Conservative Party have denied that it has even helped any children. Another member of the Conservative Party said it is a garbage program. These are the types of responses we get on an important national issue in every region of our nation. The issue of affordability is an important aspect, especially at this time. The member for Prince Albert went on to say that we do not need that. Families can take the responsibility of feeding their own family members. There is a great deal of merit in arguing that family members do provide for family members, but to make that blanket statement about all 400,000-plus children does a disservice to what is a good, sound public policy. (1205) Let us carry it over to groceries. We have the groceries and essentials benefit.”
“I can recall former leader Sharon Carstairs talking about it in the Manitoba legislature and outside the legislature. To deny that is to deny the reality of what is taking place in the communities we represent. It even goes beyond the issue of affordability. Not every child goes to school with a full tummy that would enable them to digest the education or what the teachers are saying in the classroom. Having a permanent national food program would help deal with not only the issue of affordability, but also a social issue that is real and very tangible. When I put the question to the member for Prince Albert , his response was that, in essence, that is the difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals. The Conservatives say, no, we do not need a program like that.”
“I want to address those types of issues in my comments. I posed a question to the member for Prince Albert . There are two issues I would like to reflect on with regard to that particular question. I asked the member for Prince Albert about the national food program. This government and the Prime Minister made a very clear statement saying we are going to make a national food program permanent in our schools across this country, in every region. Over 400,000 children will directly benefit from that program. I further commented to the member for Prince Albert saying that for generations there have been issues surrounding children not having food when they go to school. I know that first-hand because I have witnessed it in Manitoba.”
“Mr. Speaker, it has been an interesting debate thus far, so I thought I would contribute by maybe bringing a sense of reality to the situation and take more of a holistic approach to what is taking place. We all have a responsibility to stay in tune with our constituents. There is no doubt there is concern about affordability. There is concern about the economy. People are concerned about trade and tariff issues. There are concerns with regard to social programs, whether it is dealing with issues of health care, stabilizing the immigration issue or dental care programs. There is a much larger picture that needs to be taken into consideration when we debate the motion the Conservative Party has put forward. I would also suggest there is a need for us to look at the manner in which the far right is expressing itself today.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. The Conservatives want the government to take some specific actions, yet when we take actions to support the issue of affordability, the Conservatives vote against them. Let me give a good example. I hope the member can relate to a problem that has been around for generations. When I was first elected in 1988, people were talking about children not being able to learn on empty stomachs. This Prime Minister and this government have made a permanent national food program for our schools. Does the member see it as a positive thing, on the issue of affordability, that young children have meals while they are at school?”
“Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the member opposite tries to imply, the Government of Canada understands the issue of affordability. That is why we see relief, in terms of the excise tax on gasoline. I have a question for the member opposite. Why does the Conservative Party not support the groceries and essentials program that the Government of Canada has brought forward, which is providing significant relief to millions of Canadians? The Conservative Party says it does not want to support that one. On the one hand, the Conservatives want us to do a little bit more. On the other hand, they vote against it when we do it in the form of the grocery program.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member could give a clear indication of whether the NDP supports in any way increasing natural resource exports. In particular, does the NDP support any sort of pipeline extensions or expansion?”
“Mr. Speaker, talk about extreme statements. We will have to review Hansard, but I believe the member said that seniors are now being starved to death. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, he says yes. We have a Conservative leader who tours the country, as well as other Conservatives, saying that Canada is broken. Canadians are not stupid, and they are not going to believe the type of misinformation that the Conservatives pump out day after day. The extreme statement of saying that seniors are starving to death in Canada just highlights the type of irresponsible statements coming from the opposition today. I am wondering if the member will withdraw that particular comment, or at least provide clarity.”
“Mr. Speaker, with respect to the spring economic update, if they reflect on the 2025‑26 projected deficit, they will see that there would be a substantial $11‑billion reduction dealing with that issue alone. I understand that the Conservatives want to cut and cut. One of the things that I would ask the member opposite, the finance critic, is this. The government has made a substantial commitment to increase military expenditures, bringing it to the 2% level. I would like a clear answer from the Conservative Party. Do the Conservatives support the investment that the Government of Canada would be putting into the military? Do they support the 2% investment and, further to that, growing it to 5%? A simple yes or no would be wonderful.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member made reference to the Red Seal program. It is a program that I believe has a great deal of support. To elevate that program by saying we want more young people to enter these dozens of trades, of skilled, good quality jobs, and that we want 80,000 to 100,000 new workers over the next five years, is a very powerful statement to young people and others. Could the member expand on that point?”
“I am wondering if the member could provide her thoughts on why it is really important that, as a government, we invest in Canadians and in infrastructure.”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciated my colleague's comments on the Canada Strong fund. I think it is a wonderful opportunity for Canadians to invest in Canada. To have that opportunity, I think is something that is being provided for here. The Conservatives have come out against it. We often hear Conservatives being against the Infrastructure Bank, for example. It is a bank that, along with the federal government, has lured billions of dollars of investment, generated thousands of jobs and had major projects in every region of the country. The contrast seems to be that the current government believes in investing in Canada, in infrastructure and in Canadians, while the Conservatives tend to just want to get out of the way, as they often say.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member talked about reality at the very beginning, and he needs a reality shake. We can look at the holistic approach of this government in the last year, with a new Prime Minister and a new government, and look at the many initiatives that are actually driving and making a positive difference. I will use one example. The member mocks the idea of a sovereignty fund. Other countries around the world actually have sovereignty funds. The Conservatives do not understand what it is. I have heard the debate, and the Speaker will not allow me enough time to provide the rationale as to why the sovereignty fund, or the Canada strong fund, is a good fund. The Conservative Kool-Aid says no, it is bad, and it is broken. That is all they ever say. They go around Canada, and Canada is—”
“Mr. Speaker, I would take the member to task for his comments in regard to the degree to which this Prime Minister and this government, through their approach, are expanding Canada's economy beyond the United States. We have a Prime Minister who got commitments of billions of dollars last year. We have a Prime Minister and a government that have secured numerous signatories on trade agreements of different forms. We have passed legislation on trade agreements with Northern Ireland and Indonesia. We have trade agreements that are in the works for countries such as India, from which the biggest delegation ever, from what I understand, is in Ottawa today dealing with trade. We have commitments working with Philippines and other countries developing trade. I wonder if he might want to retract some of his comments.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if my colleague can provide his thoughts on the important Red Seal program we brought in. There are dozens of skilled trades with national recognition where a financial incentive is being provided for individuals, I am thinking specifically for young Canadians, to be able to enter into dozens of skilled trades. With the government providing that incentive, we are looking at somewhere in the neighbourhood of 80,000 to 100,000 potential trade jobs over the next five years. Can the member provide his thoughts on why it is so important that we invest in Canadians?”
“I am wondering if my friend would not agree that those three tax initiatives were wonderful to see put into place and that he clearly supports them.”
“Mr. Speaker, my friend was making reference to the important issue of taxation during his speech. I would remind my friend that it has been about one year since the election, and the very first action that our Prime Minister took was to get rid of the carbon tax, which I think was very well-received by Canadians. Then a second action, taken just before summer, was a tax break for the middle class that benefited 22 million Canadians. Fast-forward to today, and we have yet another tax break dealing with the important issue of affordability, where we see the gas tax being reduced by the federal government on a temporary basis to help deal with the price of gas, given what is taking place in the Middle East.”
“Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 1002 , 1003 , 1004 , 1005 , 1006 , 1007 , 1008 , 1009 , 1010 , 1011 , 1012 , 1013 , 1014 , 1015 and 1016 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.”
“Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 31 petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member could provide her thoughts in regard to the issue of affordability, whether it is the tax break or the groceries and essentials benefit program that the government has. I would like her thoughts on affordability.”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate many of the comments that my colleague put on the record. There is one thing that I think is really important for us to recognize. She made reference to building a strong, healthy economy, an economy that is there for all Canadians, and that is something we want. Earlier, there was a discussion in regard to the importance of trade. Trade is so critically important to our nation. We make up, I believe, 0.5% of the world population, yet when it comes to international trade, we contribute 2.5% of world trade. The province of Ontario has a manufacturing industry second to no other in the country. Can the member provide her thoughts on just how important it is that we diversify our trade opportunities to help build a stronger, healthier economy?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the issue of trade. The Conservative member made reference to ports. Within the last year, with our Prime Minister , we actually have serious investments in major projects, including in the port of Montreal. It is one of the major projects. The member also talked about something that is really important to Manitoba, and that is the port of Churchill. For the first time in generations, there is a great deal of optimism about the port of Churchill actually moving forward, which is great for the province, but also, like the port of Montreal, it is good for Canada when we look at investments of that nature. Could the member provide her thoughts on how important it is that we continue to look at major projects and investing in Canada's infrastructure?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to make two quick points. First, when the current leader of the Conservative Party was part of the Conservative government, which was a majority government, using time allocation was very commonplace. In fact, the record number of time allocations used was when the leader of the Conservative Party was in government. The second is more of a question for the Minister of Finance. The government has put a great deal of focus on the issue of affordability. With this legislation, the minister has brought forward a series of tools that would assist Canadians on the issue of affordability. I am wondering if he could provide his thoughts on the gas tax break and on how important it was to provide the groceries and essentials benefit program. Again, both are dealing with the very important issue of affordability for Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will give it my best shot. It is because of a specific recommendation. Justice Arbour knew, consulted and worked with hundreds if not thousands of people, directly or indirectly, including victims. Her recommendation says that these offences “should be prosecuted exclusively in civilian criminal courts in all cases.” There is an exemption if it takes place outside of Canada. I personally have more confidence in that report today than in what has been brought before me. That is the reason.”