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 34 of 73.
“Then we had a new Prime Minister and 70 new members of Parliament on the Liberal benches, and there was a change in policy, which got rid of the carbon tax. We did that as an affordability measure, and it was very important to the Prime Minister and to the caucus to get rid of the carbon tax. What happened as a result? If we listen to the Conservative economists within that caucus, there should have been zero food inflation, but then the Conservatives came up with all these different excuses, such as when the member for Foothills was saying that the reason we now have food inflation is that Canada has X tax and Y tax. The member was comparing Canada to the United States, because the United States' food inflation is actually a little lower than what it is in Canada today, and he said Canada's food inflation was because we had these taxes.”
“Madam Speaker, the leader of the Conservative Party said that he was going to fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. What a dud of an idea that turned out to be, when in fact the governor has done a phenomenal job protecting the Canadian economy, looking at where our overall inflation rate has been and making sure the interest rate matches. The economy in Canada, compared to that of other G20 nations over the last number of years, has done exceptionally well. Let us go on to the idea we have talked about quite a bit today: the carbon tax. A year and a half ago, every member of the Conservative Party who spoke in the chamber would so often say that getting rid of the carbon tax would make inflation virtually disappear.”
“Do members remember, years ago, cryptocurrency and how many seniors lost money, possibly because of the leader of the Conservative Party's saying he loved cryptocurrency, and maybe even implying that it should be a great alternative to the Canadian dollar? People lost a lot of money on that. Then the Conservatives had the other idea. They are going to fire— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time. First, I must respond to the comment from my colleague across the way about my friend and colleague from northern Saskatchewan, who has actually done more in the last 10 months than the 13 members of Parliament who sit representing Saskatchewan in the Conservative Party have in the last decade. Quite frankly, it is truly amazing. Maybe that is a good area to kind of pick up on. Let us take a look at what I would classify as a flash of reality for members opposite. I have had the opportunity to ask a few questions today about why Canadians should believe the Conservatives on the type of ideas they are presenting today. We can do a reflection on some of the ideas their current leader has had over the last number of years.”
“Madam Speaker, the member was a big part of the speeches delivered by the Conservative Party 18 months ago, when we were hearing the Conservatives say on a daily basis that if we got rid of the carbon tax, inflation would be gone. It was going to resolve all the problems dealing with inflation. The government was being told to get rid of the carbon tax. Canada's new Prime Minister made a commitment, and we got rid of the carbon tax, as everyone knows. He got rid of it in order to increase the disposable income of Canadians. That is the reason it was gotten rid of. The impact on food inflation was nowhere near what the Conservatives predicted it would be. Why should Canadians believe Conservative ideas like what we are hearing today when their other ideas are such disasters?”
“Madam Speaker, I wonder if the member can explain to me how, using his logic, there were years, 2022 and 2023, when Canada's food inflation was less than the United States' food inflation, and we had the carbon tax in place at that point. I am thinking in terms of the comments that you made, implying it is the industrial carbon tax that has caused our food inflation to be higher than that of the United States. What happened to that principle before, when Canada's food inflation was less than the U.S.A.'s food inflation?”
“Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order, because I think it is appropriate. I made an accusation of the member for Foothills , and I would like to apologize. It was not he who made the unparliamentary remarks; it was in fact the member for Miramichi—Grand Lake . I would ask for him to take the opportunity to apologize for using the unparliamentary language.”
“Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Foothills posed a question. Then the government whip responded to it. While the government whip was responding, the member for Foothills heckled inappropriate language that not only I heard but also a number of my colleagues heard. We would ask that he withdraw the comments.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. Conservative after Conservative is happy to jump up and say that this year, we have the worst food inflation in the G7. However, if we look at the last five years, we will find that this is not the case, that Canada does relatively well. When we did get a high year compared with other G7 countries, we are in the process of passing Bill C-19 , the grocery benefit, doing exactly what a caring government should do. Will the member at least acknowledge that Canada is not broken and is doing relatively well on the inflation file?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have come up with this imaginary food tax. If we were to carry their logic through on this one, it would mean we would take away the taxes on the income of a farmer, a truck driver or a store clerk because they also add to the food costs, no doubt. At the end of the day, it is all imaginary with the Conservatives. They have clearly demonstrated that their ideas just do not work. They are not feasible. Why should any Canadian give any credibility to the types of silly motions we have before us today in the House of Commons?”
“Mr. Speaker, I find that Conservative ideas really do not work. Members can think about it. The Conservatives said we should get rid of the carbon tax. Do members remember the hundreds of speeches they gave on that? That was supposed to get rid of inflation, period. The new Prime Minister of Canada actually made the decision to get rid of the carbon tax so that we could increase the disposable income for Canadians. Let us take a look at the past year. Over the last five years, Canada has done relatively well on food inflation. When we look at this year, it is a little higher than we would like. That is why we brought in Bill C-19 . That is why it will likely pass this week, to support Canadians. Does the member truly believe his policy is worth the effort?”
“Mr. Speaker, it should be pointed out that Stephen Harper and the member's leader built zero inches of pipeline to the west coast. The member wants to talk about facts, and he makes reference to the G7. In the last five years, adding total food inflation, Canada is not the worst. In fact, we might be third or maybe fourth. I am not 100% sure of that, but at the end of the day, this illustrates that the Conservative Party of Canada comes up with flash ideas, and it has been demonstrated time and time again that their ideas just do not work. Why should we believe them now? If the member—”
“Mr. Speaker, I have a flash warning: Conservative ideas just do not work. Quite frankly, I remember how many hundreds of speeches I heard from the Conservatives 14 months ago in which they said that if we get rid of the carbon tax, there will not be any inflation. People can look it up. There are dozens if not hundreds of speeches like that. We have a new Prime Minister and a new government, and we got rid of the carbon tax. Is it a coincidence that food prices did not go down? We got rid of the carbon tax to give Canadians more disposable income. That is what the grocery benefit is about, the one the Conservatives supposedly voted for yesterday. Why should Canadians give any credibility to Conservative policy? It turns out to be a disaster all the time.”
“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 its study on trade diversification, six members of the Standing Committee on International Trade be authorized to travel to Brasilia, Brazil; and Buenos Aires, Argentina, in the winter/spring of 2026, during an adjournment period, and that the necessary staff accompany the Committee.”
“Mr. Speaker, I had a wonderful discussion with Canadian dairy farmers this morning. We talked about the whole supply management issue. Supply management is a wonderful way for Canadians to appreciate the whole issue of food security and food sovereignty. This is one of the reasons we have the Prime Minister and other members of the Liberal caucus speaking very positively on the whole issue of supply management. There was a motion that was brought forward by the Bloc. It is not very often that I agree with the Bloc, but on that particular motion, I was very agreeable. Could the member provide his thoughts with regard to—”
“Mr. Speaker, that is just it. The government, the Prime Minister and, in fact, every Liberal member of Parliament understand the sensitivity of this issue. That is why we introduced Bill C-19 yesterday, which would provide support for groceries and essentials. This is something the government has responded to in a very tangible way. We listened to the Conservative speeches yesterday. Yes, they allowed it to go forward, but, at the end of the day, the government and the Prime Minister understand the issue. We are taking specific actions to support Canadians. Why does the Conservative Party not act, as opposed to just talking about being sympathetic to Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, contrary to the misinformation of the Conservatives, Canada is not broken. In looking at the food price inflation the member is talking about, has a member ever thought, “Why do we not take a look at the last five years?” If he did, he would find that, cumulatively, Canada is not the worst in the G7. Instead, after a challenging year, we have a government and a Prime Minister who have responded. We saw that response yesterday with the groceries and essentials benefit, which is putting tangible dollars into the pockets of Canadians. The Conservatives reluctantly allowed that legislation to pass on division. Does the hon. member support the Liberal initiative that was presented yesterday?”
“Mr. Speaker, Bill C-19 is a piece of legislation that will at least be a sincere and genuine attempt by the government to provide assistance to individuals through a program that will see significant amounts of money helping with the issue of affordability of groceries. The Conservatives like to give this impression that Canada is broken. Today we have heard a lot about Canada having the worst inflation in the G7. If we go back for the last five years and take a look at the cumulative inflation rate, there might be one or two countries in the G7 that actually have done better than Canada on that front. When the member talks about thinking about future generations, that is exactly what the government is doing. That is one of the reasons we have Bill C-19.”
“Does he genuinely believe that programs such as the national school program for nutrition, which is now a permanent program, and the dental program are programs that his own constituents would not support?”
“Mr. Speaker, the member talked about how they are going to get rid of this and they are going to get rid of that as the Conservative Party. We know and understand that the Conservative Party has a certain mentality. That mentality has been demonstrated yet again today, which is just to get out of the way and get the government to stop providing for Canadians. It appears as if the Conservatives are prepared to allow this legislation to go through. I am grateful for that, because I believe that this legislation, in a very targeted way, is going to help 10 million Canadians on the issue of affordability, particularly with dealing with grocery prices. My question to the member is on the attitude the Conservative Party has of getting out of the way.”
“Mr. Speaker, the short answer is this. It is because the leader of the Conservative Party , which has really gone far right, I would ultimately argue, takes this “just get out of the way” attitude, as if government does not have any role to play in terms of assisting Canadians in any fashion whatsoever. We have seen that demonstrated day after day. I believe, from a national perspective, that the government does have and must play a role in supporting Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, ultimately, I believe this is the most effective way for the government to support grocery relief for Canadians. For Canadians, including single parents, some with three children, and those on a fixed income, many of whom will be seniors, the most effective way of ultimately delivering and putting the money in the pockets of Canadians is done through exactly what Bill C-19 is doing. There is that one-time enhancement payment and then an ongoing increase that will be there for the next four or five years. It increases disposable income in order to deal specifically with the issue of food inflation.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am at a condo on Metcalfe and Lisgar, and there is a Farm Boy nearby. Maybe the member and I could go there and buy some eggs, milk and bread. Then we could see if there is any tax on those three items or the groceries Canadians want to buy. This is an imaginary tax, and the Conservative Party is trying to give Canadians a false impression around it. The member knows full well that the items I have referred to, those basic groceries, are not being taxed. The member knows that, but it will not stop the Conservative Party from saying otherwise, unfortunately. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“I believe that Canadians as a whole understand what the Prime Minister and government are doing through Bill C-19. That is the reason that in all likelihood it will only pass on division. The Conservative right does not want to vote in favour of it; they just do not want to—”
“We have to know that today's Conservative Party, the far right, will get rid of these programs. Would they bring in a program such as Bill C-19 ? No, because in the comments they make, they would say, “Forget that and just do something permanent. Get rid of the GST,” or something like that. I am waiting for them to come out with that particular policy. I think it is only a question of time. That is how far gone they are. This is a focused attempt to support Canadians, even in Conservative ridings. They want to see relief; C-19 provides them substantial relief. It shows that the government is listening, much like when the Premier of Manitoba made a statement about the cost of milk in order to minimize the inflation on milk in the province of Manitoba. Manitobans appreciated that.”
“This is not new, but with the Conservatives' “get out of the way” attitude, we can see that they would get rid of this program that the Prime Minister and government have put into place, which members across the way have called a “garbage” program. We have even heard some members say that it does not even feed children. It is constant misinformation. These are the types of programs that matter. Canadians in Conservative ridings want these programs. Millions of Canadians are benefiting from the dental program. For the first time in many years, some seniors are getting the dental work that they have been wanting, because of that program. We have a Prime Minister and a government reinforcing the importance of that program, and the Conservative Party's response is “get out of the way”.”
“Anyone who is a progressive or red Conservative has to feel uncomfortable with the direction of the Conservative Party, because their mentality is “get out of the way”. We heard it today, and we have heard it for months coming from the leader of the Conservative Party. What does “get out of the way” mean? The Prime Minister and the government made a decision that the national school food program was successful and that we needed to make it permanent. This is a program that has been needed, not just in the last few years, but since the 1980s, and maybe even earlier than that. I remember standing in the Manitoba legislature, listening to individuals such as Sharon Carstairs back in the 1980s, saying that we needed to feed children in schools, because they cannot learn on an empty stomach.”
“Speaker, they say, “Hear, hear!” and they applaud. We also hear it from the leader of the Conservative Party, and we have witnessed first-hand the types of actions the Conservative Party would take if it were given the chance to govern. These are the far right Conservatives. Do not get them confused with progressive Conservatives. I feel for those Conservative members of Parliament who are so-called “red Tories”, or progressive in their thinking, who genuinely care about how social programming and government policy can give a lifting hand. The current leadership just had a convention, and I was amazed in terms of how much support he received from within the Conservative right.”
“We are talking about literally millions and millions of dollars being invested to ensure that we can see companies expand in terms of food production. (1630) We are recognizing that food banks do play an important role. They have played an important role in society, not just in the last few years but for decades now. When I was an MLA many years ago, food banks played a very important role, and that continues today. The Prime Minister and the government have recognized the need to support those organizations, which is why we are putting in $20 million. These are initiatives that are there to really help. I have listened to the Conservatives respond to this legislation. What was the finance critic 's plea? The best thing that the government can do is “get out of the way”. An hon. member: Hear, hear! Kevin Lamoureux: Mr.”
“It is about being there to support Canadians who really need that support, and we have come up with a way of doing it that is not only for this year but for a number of following years. From my perspective, it clearly demonstrates a government that is responding to a need that is there, even though our overall inflation rate is relatively under control, especially when compared to other nations of the G20, if I may say that. We are genuinely concerned about food inflation. That is why the Prime Minister made an announcement dealing with greenhouses and what we could do as a government to support the building of greenhouses. It is about food security. It is about how we can enhance opportunities to stabilize food prices into the future, so that we are not as reliant on other trading partners or on the climate to the same degree.”
“Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, he should be applauded for taking that action; I agree. Another action he took was to give a tax break, reducing taxes for 22 million Canadians. These are the types of initiatives that were taken shortly after the last election. We continue to look at ways we can support Canadians. When we take a look at the grocery prices as a whole, we see that Canada is doing relatively well compared to the rest of the world in terms of the cost of some basic products like eggs, milk, apples and so forth. However, we realize that inflation and food costs are going up and we want to be able to assist Canadians, especially those who really need that assistance. That is what Bill C-19 is all about.”
“I have heard lots of discussions and a lot of debates on the issue of how we have our greatest asset, the Prime Minister , going abroad, travelling and bringing in investments, bringing in trade opportunities and export opportunities in particular, and talking about the importance of jobs and how important those things really are, along with the idea of building Canada strong by building capital projects. It is all very critical. At the same time, it is really important that we recognize what Canadians' immediate needs are. The issue of affordability is very real, and it is there. We have a prime minister and a government that are responding once again to that issue. Members should recall that one of the very first actions the Prime Minister of Canada took was to get rid of the carbon tax. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak to Bill C-19 . It was not that long ago, just back in April, when Canadians had a vote and elected the new Prime Minister of Canada, along with 70 new Liberal members of Parliament. Through that last election, a number of issues really came to the surface. The whole idea of building Canada strong, building healthier and stronger communities, is something the government and the Prime Minister have been focused on since day one. We have seen substantial legislation and budgetary measures to demonstrate very clearly to Canadians that this is a government and a prime minister who genuinely care and will do whatever they can to be there to support Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, what we have before us in Bill C-19 is recognition of the importance of providing an increase in disposable income to support individuals in acquiring their groceries. This is the essence of the legislation. We are not talking about just this year. Over the next few years, Canadians will continue to receive that extra bump up from the grocery rebate. This is, again, to take into consideration the inflation on groceries. I wonder if the member would recognize that having it over the next four or five years is actually a positive thing. From listening to her, I know she would like to see it as a permanent thing, but at the very least, we are recognizing the need today to assist people in dealing with food inflation.”
“Would the member not agree that one of the best places to have that substantial dialogue is at the committee stage and then to continue on in third reading at some point?”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate many of the comments the member put on the record this afternoon. It pleases me, the degree to which we have wonderful support coming from the House on this particular piece of legislation and ultimately for seeing it go to committee. I understand that the Bloc, and I suspect the Conservatives, have genuine concerns in regard to the bill's ultimate implementation and maybe want to talk about some potential alternatives. However, recognizing the principle of supporting Canadians in a tangible way by providing them that additional disposable income to help out with groceries is hopefully something all of us can agree on. That is why it is so important that we pass the legislation.”
“Mr. Speaker, many Ukrainian settlers came to Canada in order to escape the conflict and instability that has been caused by the illegal Russian invasion. Many of them have settled in rural communities and gained employment, become entrepreneurs and so forth. They are asking for Parliament to work with provincial jurisdictions, in particular in my case in the province of Manitoba, to respond, hopefully favourably, with respect to how we would be able to ensure that settlers are afforded the opportunity to continue on and to ultimately even become permanent residents, through a sense of co-operation between Ottawa and provincial and territorial governments.”
“Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Finance can amplify why this legislation is so important. I know the feedback that I have received and the feedback from many of our colleagues is that affordability is an important issue. Canadians are genuinely concerned about grocery prices. Can the minister give a clear statement of why every member of the Conservative Party should be making it very clear that they support the legislation?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged, to a certain degree, because it takes a lot of bravery for the member to go against what his leader is saying. He believes that a safety valve is an effective tool. That is what he has said on the record. I can appreciate that his leader and the entire Conservative caucus disagree. On the issue of filibustering, let us be very clear that we would have bail legislation today, had it not been for the filibustering the Conservative Party has done on Bill C-14 . There are four substantial pieces of legislation dealing with the crime file, which is important to the Prime Minister and every Liberal member of the House. Canadians are also concerned about getting crime bills passed. The Conservative Party continues to filibuster. Why?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is really important for all members of all political parties to realize that when we talk about the issue of crime, the Prime Minister made a commitment to Canadians in an election platform, and we have substantial legislation before us. We can talk about Bill C-2 , Bill C-9 , Bill C-14 or Bill C-16 , the debate that we are having today. Bill C-14 is bail reform legislation. Bill C-16 reinstates mandatory minimums. All of these are important pieces of legislation, and the Conservative Party, for whatever reason, continues to not allow that legislation, as a package, to pass. The Conservatives want to filibuster it. If the member is genuinely concerned about fighting crime in Canada, why are Conservatives filibustering this important legislation—”
“Mr. Speaker, in so many ways, the member is just wrong in many of his assertions. I would ultimately argue that the new Prime Minister and the government, in the last nine months since the last election, have put forward a substantial crime legislation agenda. We have witnessed, day after day from the Conservative Party, a filibuster of an important issue that Canadians want us to address. Bill C-16 is yet another example. Through Bill C-16 we would see the reinstatement of many mandatory minimums. It will not weaken the process. Conservatives try to give a false impression that it would. Does the member really believe the Conservative Party of Canada is reflecting the interests of Canadians by not allowing the legislative agenda dealing with crime to pass?”
“Mr. Speaker, when I look at this particular piece of legislation, I think it is important to emphasize the difference between the Bloc and the government of the day, the Liberal Party of Canada. We will find that every Liberal member of Parliament recognizes that one of the greatest assets that Canada has, when we talk about building Canada strong, is the diversity of Canada. It is the people of Canada who make our nation as great as it is. When the Bloc talks about getting rid of multiculturalism in the province of Quebec, I believe that what they are really doing is taking away a valuable asset or suggesting that we not recognize the sense of equality, the opportunities and the advantage that Canada has, more than most other countries, which is our diversity.”
“Even Canadians in Conservative ridings are getting upset with the ongoing filibustering that the Conservative Party continues to put in on crime bills. Will the member not at least give us some sort of a commitment to see this crime legislation pass before the end of February?”
“Madam Speaker, I disagree completely with the member opposite. In fact, if he were to give the bill a chance, he would see there is a reinstatement of mandatory minimums. I would highly recommend that he read of those that would be reinstated as a direct result of this legislation. What upsets me most about the Conservative Party of Canada today is that its members like to talk tough. They like to raise a lot of money on the crime file, but we have a Prime Minister who was just elected nine months ago, along with 70 new Liberal members of Parliament. It is a new government with a very aggressive crime agenda, a series of legislation, and the Conservative Party has done nothing but stand in the way of the legislation passing.”
“Madam Speaker, I do appreciate many of the comments the member has put on the record. When I think of the legislation, Bill C-16 , I think about how it is dealing with the issue of deepfakes and also in regard to elevating femicide to first-degree murder. I think we are in a good position to see the bill go to committee so there can be further discussion. Can the member provide any further thoughts she may have on the two specific issues I raise?”
“Will the member not agree that it is time that the Conservative Party started listening to Canadians, those in Conservative ridings too, and allow important legislation of this nature to pass through the system? The legislation needs to get to the committee. Will the member commit to having the entire legislative agenda in terms of the crime file pass before the end of February?”
“Madam Speaker, I believe that the member has it wrong. Bill C-16 would reinstate numerous mandatory minimum penalties, something Canadians want to see, yet the Conservatives are opposing it. We have a series of crime legislation. We can talk about Bill C-29 , Bill C-9 and Bill C-14 , which were popular pieces of bail reform legislation, or about the legislation we have today. The Conservative Party continues to deny the passage of this type of legislation, and then the Conservatives try to say they are not filibustering. That is just not true. The reason we do not have bail reform legislation passed in Canada today is the Conservative Party of Canada. That is the truth; they cannot change the facts.”
“Madam Speaker, I do not know if the member is aware, but Bill C-16 would reinstate mandatory minimums, which is something Canadians want to see. However, the Conservatives seem to want to oppose even that aspect of the legislation. They want to factor it out. Not only do they want to change the legislation, but they do not even want to see the legislation pass. Will the member make a personal commitment that she would like to support Bill C-16 , in some capacity, to pass before the end of February?”
“Mr. Speaker, we must recognize that Bill C-16 would actually reinstate mandatory minimums. It would put in a safety valve so that we would be charter-compliant. The Conservative member from Kamloops, who sits right in front of that member, has actually advocated in the past on the need for a safety valve. The Conservative Party, much like it is doing with Bill C-14 , wants to continue to prevent the legislative agenda from passing. I have asked one of the member's colleagues, and now I will ask the member: Would he, or the Conservative Party, agree that it is part of a crime package including Bill C-14 and make a commitment, at least a personal commitment, to allow this legislation to pass all readings before the end of February?”
“After all, even Canadians in Conservative ridings want this type of legislation to pass. Will the Conservative Party commit to passing the legislation before the end of February?”