Eric Lefebvre
Richmond—Arthabaska, Quebec · Conservative · Canada
“I hope the Liberals will be the eyes, ears and voice of their constituents this summer, because they are probably going to be surprised by what they hear. Canadians are not happy that their public finances are being mismanaged. They do not like that.”
“I am asking the minister to let me go meet with these employees so that they can explain what is going wrong, because that is our role. The minister refuses to meet with them. This is no joke. People working for the government want to help us, but the government refuses to meet with them.”
“I offered to meet with her and with the employees who use the Cúram system so that they can tell us what is not working so that she could fix it. She turned down my offer. Employees are willing to help us and to help the Liberal government fix this fiasco, but what did the Liberals do? They turned a deaf ear.”
“Actually, it is more accurately described as flagrant, persistent, calculated and insulting disrespect on the part of the Liberal government, day after day, toward Parliament, toward our democratic institutions, and toward all Canadians. The Parliament of Canada is a sacred place.”
“They shut down debate on Bill C‑26 . They shut down debate on Bill C‑20 . They shut down debate on Bill C‑9 . Finally, they shut down debate on Bill C‑30 . Elected officials did not have the time to study the legislation, question experts in committee or amend the clauses, which needed quite a bit of work.”
“Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to deviate slightly from protocol, as I would like to speak about a colleague who is held in high regard by all. His zest for life is unmatched. I am, of course, referring to our colleague from Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata , who suffered a serious medical emergency last week.”
The complete record
Every one of 273 lines we hold for Eric Lefebvre, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 6.
“Mr. Speaker, all week long I have been asking questions about the Cúram system, a financial disaster that was supposed to cost $1.6 billion but ended up costing $6.6 billion and leaving 86,000 seniors waiting for their money. The answer that I was repeatedly given was to provide the names of the people concerned. Seriously, is this what passes for Liberal leadership? I am going to give the minister one last chance to come up with an answer that does not involve asking for names. If she tells me once again that she wants us to submit names, it will simply prove the Liberals' incompetence. How will the member show leadership, I wonder?”
“Mr. Speaker, the minister said to give her names. I gave her two names this week. Does she want the names, addresses and phone numbers of the 86,000 seniors who are waiting for their pension and GIS? The Minister of Transport says that the system is being modernized. The projected cost of $1.6 billion has now reached $6.6 billion. The money the Liberals are spending is Canadians' hard-earned money. Meanwhile, our seniors are waiting to pay their rent and buy groceries. Who is taking responsibility for this financial fiasco, and who is going to stand up and apologize?”
“I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the presence on the Hill today of the chamber of commerce's president, Valérie Mercier, its executive director, Anne-Marie Bédard, and board members and governors, who are true ambassadors.”
“Mr. Speaker, today I would like to highlight the vital role that the Chambre de commerce et d'industrie des Bois‑Francs et de L’Érable, the CCIBFE, has played in our region's economic development for over 120 years. As an active member of the chamber of commerce for two decades, I have first-hand experience with its energy, leadership and role in bringing the business community together. Through its networking activities, training, advocacy and concrete support for businesses, the CCIBFE is truly a regional economic driver. Its commitment to innovation, collaboration and the vitality of the business community directly contributes to the prosperity of our communities. I am grateful to the board of directors, the team and all the members for the remarkable work they have done to serve our entrepreneurs.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' mismanagement repeats and repeats like a broken record. In 2022, they gave us the ArriveCAN app. The budget was $86,000, but the actual cost was $60 million. Five years later, the same Liberal team is back with more IT scandals, this time with Cúram. The initial budget was $1.6 billion, but the actual cost is $6.6 billion, and it is a failure. The Minister of Transport tells us that there are a handful of cases, but in fact, 86,000 seniors are waiting for their money. What do you have to say to seniors like Sylvie Bolduc in my riding? By the way, your answer is going out live on air.”
“Mr. Speaker, the minister's own employees say that the system does not work. Our seniors built our country and paid taxes their entire lives. Now there are some who have to wait eight months to get their money. It is unacceptable. I have a specific example. Martial Lavoie in my riding is still waiting. Do members know what Mr. Lavoie did? He postponed his retirement because his help was needed. There was a need for employees. He remained in service. Now he wants to retire and he cannot get his money. What does the minister have to say to Mr. Lavoie? He is listening right now.”
“Mr. Speaker, once again, the Liberals have created an IT fiasco. The Cúram system, which is used to pay old age security benefits, has gone from $1.75 billion to $6.6 billion. Worse still, 93% of public servants give it a failing grade. Employees are reportedly under strict instructions not to blame the software when communicating with the public. How could the Liberals have failed so badly? What will the minister do about the software? Did the minister approve these irresponsible increases?”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to two paramedics from the Richmond—Arthabaska riding whose courage and composure deserve to be recognized. On January 8, when a major fire raged on in a building on King Street in Richmond, Serge Boulanger and David Leclerc, paramedics at the Coopérative des travailleurs d'ambulance de l'Estrie, performed an act of extreme bravery. Quickly arriving at the scene of the fire and seeing that vulnerable people were still inside, they did not hesitate to enter the smoke-filled building to evacuate an elderly tenant who was completely unaware of the danger. Their quick, thoughtful and safe response undoubtedly saved a life, in addition to coming to the aid of the affected patient. Beyond their regular duties, they have demonstrated an exemplary sense of duty, courage and humanity.”
“Mr. Speaker, the first point is the promise. The Prime Minister promised that we would have the fastest-growing economy in the G7. The second point is the results. GDP growth for November was 0%. In fact, the GDP is expected to decline in the fourth quarter. The automotive sector is down 12.6%. The forestry sector is down 2.8%. The third point is the consequences. Businesses are delaying plans to expand, grow or invest in Canada. They are choosing the United States. My question is simple. When will the Prime Minister put our ideas for cutting bureaucracy and taxes into practice?”
“Mr. Speaker, our seniors built this country and they paid taxes their entire lives, and yet some of them are having to wait up to eight months to get their OAS cheque. That is unacceptable. There is missing or inconsistent data on the 7.4 million seniors whose files were migrated to new software. Since 2015, the government has hired 100,000 new public servants, but it is not working. Public servants are saying that they have not had proper training since the software was implemented. Politics requires courage. Who in the Liberal government will have the courage to stand up and solve the problem facing our seniors?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals think it is funny when we remind them that the Prime Minister told Canadians to judge him by the price of groceries. Prices have doubled in 10 years. The plan is a failure and Canadians are not seeing any results. That makes sense because the Liberals are using the same recipe and hoping for different results. I am not sure if the Prime Minister has had to choose between two items at the grocery store, but that is the reality for Canadians right now. I do not expect a response and I do not expect results because the Prime Minister's answer is, “Who cares?””
“Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I invite my colleague to visit the food banks right now to see all the people waiting in line. The situation is worrisome. The system is no longer working. Every month, 600,000 Quebeckers visit food banks. Fortunately, there are organizations and kind-hearted people, such as Clan Destins and many others, that are involved in my community. What I want to see is a Liberal government that takes responsibility. How can it choose to cut taxes on luxury boats when our constituents are struggling to put food on the table? Are there any other Liberal members who, like the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie , will say that enough is enough?”
“Mr. Speaker, food drives, company and organization dinners where people are asked to bring food, and roadside donation drives to raise money for our food aid organizations have well and truly begun. Lucky thing because demand is increasing significantly. The rate of food insecurity in Quebec has nearly doubled. The reality is harsh: food insecurity has gone up from 11% in 2019 to 20% in 2023 under the Liberal government. People have jobs, but they cannot afford to eat. Why is the Prime Minister maintaining the fuel tax, which makes groceries even more expensive?”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, and I also want to thank him for making the effort to ask it in French. I really appreciate that. I want to reassure my colleague that when it comes to supply management, the Conservatives and the Quebec Conservative caucus will be there to protect farmers and support them in the future. To reiterate what I say in every one of my speeches, agriculture is about what we put on our plates morning, noon and night. I would like to take this opportunity to thank farmers, who work 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, to feed Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we proposed. Currently, Bill C‑4 does not go far enough to put more money back in taxpayers' pockets. The proposed tax cut amounts to about $400 per year, which is not enough. We need to go further to put more money back in taxpayers' pockets. That is what the Conservatives will propose.”
“Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, members on this side of the House want to significantly reduce taxes so that all Canadians will have more money in their pockets to help them cope with the cost-of-living crisis.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, we made some proposals to the Liberal government to take it a step further. We need to cut taxes even more so that we can put money back in the pockets of Canadians. That is what we are going to propose. We also wanted to eliminate the industrial carbon tax. We made some proposals on this side of the House. The ball is now in the Liberals' court.”
“On this side of the House, our priority will always be to help make life in this magnificent country of Canada safer and more affordable for Canadians and their families.”
“Meanwhile, a record number of people are using food banks. Household budgets are getting tighter and tighter. The cost of housing is extremely high. Everything is more expensive, yet the government is lowering taxes on private yachts. In committee, the Liberals had a chance to support our amendments to lower taxes for all Canadians. The Liberals had a choice: They could lower taxes for workers and families or they could lower taxes for private yacht owners. They chose to help private yacht owners. Canadians are worried. Food costs more. Housing costs more. Everything costs more. Bill C-4 aims to make life more affordable, but we would like to see it go even further. We have made proposals. I hope that the Liberals will listen to our suggestions to finally help Canadians make ends meet.”
“Instead of reining in the inflationary spending that keeps making the cost of living crisis worse, the government continues to favour bureaucracy over affordability. Taxpayers continue to bear the cost of these deficits. Interest on the public debt will reach $55.6 billion in 2025–2026. Each and every Canadian will owe approximately $1,350 in interest. It will cost $1,350 per person in interest alone. Personally, I am still stunned that the Liberals decided not to tackle the cost of living in their budget. However, the Prime Minister decided that it would be a good idea to lower taxes on luxury items, more specifically, the tax on private yachts, instead of focusing on removing the taxes on groceries. We are talking about priorities. As the Prime Minister has shown, his priority was the luxury tax on private yachts.”
“The Conservatives consulted Canadians and then recommended priorities that should be included in the budget to address the cost of living, such as bringing down the deficit, eliminating the taxes on groceries and ending the inflationary taxes. Unfortunately, but once again unsurprisingly, the budget did not address these priorities. Instead, the Liberals chose not to tackle the issue of affordability. They decided to use our children's, grandchildren's and great‑grandchildren's credit cards. They decided to spend, spend, spend, spend and run a $78-billion deficit. The federal bureaucracy has increased by 80% since 2015 when the Liberals came to power, yet services have not improved.”
“This would stimulate the construction industry, ease pressure on the housing market, and provide significant assistance to Canadians. On this side of the House, that is what we believe is needed. (1335) We did everything in our power during the housing crisis to call for more affordable housing and more construction using this approach, but unsurprisingly, the Liberals refused. Third, we proposed permanently axing the consumer carbon tax and the industrial carbon tax, which make life less affordable. The Conservatives were ready to do that. Unsurprisingly, the Liberals rejected that proposal. The Liberals took one tiny step forward to alleviate the cost of living crisis by introducing Bill C-4 . However, they took several steps backward when they tabled this budget.”
“The difference is that we want to go further. First, the bill reduces the tax rate from 15% to 14%. We proposed reducing it from 15% to 12.75%. Our proposal would have saved Canadians $900 per year instead of $420. As costs continue to rise, Canadians deserve a bigger tax cut so they can buy the food they and their families need. Unsurprisingly, the Liberals rejected our amendment. I also want to mention that, during committee proceedings, the Liberals systematically filibustered this amendment for over an hour, proving how reluctant they are to lower taxes. Second, our Conservative team proposed expanding the tax rebate on new homes. Bill C‑4 proposes a rebate, but only on new homes that are first homes. What we are proposing is that this rebate apply to all Canadians who purchase a new home.”
“Food Banks Canada has even said that “employment is no longer a reliable buffer against poverty”. What does that mean? That means that even Canadians who have a job are not immune to food insecurity. Among those experiencing food insecurity—one in four—are those who work full time and are still struggling. People in my community and all across the country are working hard, but the Liberal government's endless spending continues to make livelihoods unaffordable. I have the privilege of serving as a member of the Standing Committee on Finance and the Conservative members of the committee proposed several amendments to Bill C-4. This bill essentially incorporates three of the Conservative Party's election pledges. It lowers income tax, offers a tax rebate on new homes and eliminates the consumer carbon tax.”
“Who here has ever said that they would eat if there was any food left? There are people out there right now who are saying that. That breaks my heart. We need to do everything in our power to put money back in the pockets of these men and women so that they can earn a decent living and support their families. According to the food price report published by the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University, 80.6% of Canadians say that food is the main source of financial stress and 25.5% of Canadians are food insecure. That is one in four. The average family of four is going to spend $800 more this year on groceries than it did in 2024. According to Food Banks Canada, the number of Canadians visiting food banks reached a record high of 2,165,766 visitors in March 2025.”
“Mr. Speaker, today, we are here to talk about Bill C-4 , which seeks to make life more affordable for Canadians. My Conservative colleagues and I supported Bill C-4 at second reading. I think that all members agree that we need to put more money back in taxpayers' pockets. Since 2015, everything costs more and Canadians are working harder for every dollar they earn. It is more important than ever for the government to take measures to support our workers, our families and our seniors during this cost-of-living crisis. It is especially important to help Canadians who continue to struggle because of food inflation. It is becoming more and more difficult to put food on the table. A father told us that he and his wife eat only if there is any food left after their children have eaten.”
“Mr. Speaker, after failing to reach an an agreement with the United States, the Prime Minister said, “Who cares?”. The Prime Minister backed down on the digital services tax without getting anything in return. I mean he got nothing in return for Canadians, because one day later, the Americans signed an $80-billion nuclear deal. Who did they sign it with? They signed it with Brookfield, the Prime Minister's company. Why is the Prime Minister sacrificing the interests of Canadians rather than his own interests? I can predict what the member is going to say. He is going to talk about the budget, pipelines, housing, when pigs fly, and I will not get an answer.”
“Mr. Speaker, that is precisely one of the reasons why we need to improve this bill. We cannot pass it as it now stands, like the Liberals want us to do. They have done nothing for five years. We will work to improve this bill to keep Canadians safe.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will give the same answer. This government has been doing nothing for 10 years. We have been calling on the government to get the job done for five years. Now the Liberals have suddenly seen the light and they hope to get this bill passed in three months. We will take no lessons from the Liberal government. On this side of the House, we take our jobs seriously. We are working for Canadians. That is what we will continue to do.”
“Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague, I find that rather amusing. The Liberals have been in power for 10 years and have done nothing for the past five years. They have suddenly seen the light at the end of the tunnel and want to get this done in three months. They did nothing for 10 years, and now they want us to rush this bill through because they suddenly woke up. I have to insist that Canadians be shown a little respect. We have to get this right.”
“Mr. Speaker, of course the government should have introduced a bill and dealt with this issue a long time ago. In my speech today, I named some of the people who became victims all because the Liberals have allowed this problem related to the Criminal Code to drag on. Unfortunately, some innocent victims lost their lives. Now, let us do what we must to move forward and work to improve Bill C‑14 . The government definitely needs to go further than what it has presented us with.”
“That is part of our plan to incarcerate the most dangerous people in our society longer and give them time to rehabilitate. We would like to see repeat offenders designated as dangerous offenders. That means they could only be released after demonstrating good behaviour and abstaining from all drug use. That should also include training to upgrade their skills to allow them to contribute as proud members of society and get their lives in our great country back on track. Repeat offenders are dangerous. That is why they should only be released when they no longer pose a threat to our society. For the safety of all Canadians and for the future of our children, we need to go further than what Bill C‑14 proposes.”
“Unfortunately, it does not go far enough. My priority will always be to build safer communities. I appreciate the work being done to reduce violence, but we need to do more for the victims I named earlier today. The Conservative call to strengthen our bail system is part of our plan to stop crime and make our communities safer. Our plan includes a number of priorities that we would like to see the government implement. We would like to see a “three strikes and you're out” law to keep the most dangerous criminals behind bars. Everyone agrees that the most dangerous criminals should be kept off our streets. We would also like to see mandatory minimum sentences for repeat offenders. After three strikes, we propose that repeat offenders receive a minimum sentence of 10 years.”
“Their solution is to introduce a bill that begins to address the problem, but ultimately does not go far enough. It does not truly solve the crisis facing Canadians. It does not fix the broken bail system. The same goes for Bill C‑4 , making life more affordable for Canadians act. Starting in 2015, the Liberal government created a cost of living crisis. That is what happens when a government runs one inflationary deficit after another. I hope that Bill C‑14 will be different and that the Liberals will agree to our amendments. Unfortunately, I doubt they will. The Conservatives fought to undo the Liberals' decision on bail. I am proud of my colleagues who do battle daily to make our communities safer. There is still a lot to do to fix everything this Liberal government messed up, and Bill C‑14 is just the beginning.”
“Canadians have waited long enough. While I am pleased that we are talking about these matters, Bill C‑14 still does not go far enough to protect our communities. Firstly, the principle of restraint remains intact, which preserves the existing bail culture. We must strengthen our criminal justice system to ensure that the most violent offenders in Canada cannot be released. Secondly, the mandatory minimum sentences that were repealed by Bill C‑5 have not been reinstated. We must repeal Bill C‑5 in order to guarantee that criminals who commit firearm-related offences, sexual assaults or kidnappings, or who engage in human trafficking, are given prison terms instead of house arrest. (1115) The Liberals have weakened our bail system, putting criminals back on our streets. They have made our communities less safe, unfortunately.”
“Extortion has exploded, increasing by 330% all across Canada. Sexual assaults are up 76%. Homicides are up 29%. I think most Canadians would agree with me that this has been one of the greatest failures, if the not single greatest failure, of this Liberal government. In early October, our Conservative team moved a motion asking the House of Commons to immediately pass the bill introduced by my colleague, the hon. member for Oxford , Bill C‑242 , or the jail not bail act. Unsurprisingly, the Liberals voted against the motion. That is another clear sign that they do not take this matter seriously. For more than seven months now, the Prime Minister has been promising to reform the bail system in Canada. By not voting in favour of our motion, he continues to delay the implementation of measures that would make our streets safer.”
“A number of years ago, the Liberals passed bills C‑5 and C‑75 . These two bills caused crime to skyrocket and made our communities less safe. Bill C‑5, which repealed certain mandatory minimum penalties, eliminated mandatory prison sentences for serious firearm- and drug-related offences. Bill C‑75, the Liberal catch-and-release bill, granted bail to repeat violent offenders. These bills form the foundation of the Liberals' soft-on-crime plan. It is hard to believe that a government would deliberately pass legislation that reduces prison terms for the most dangerous members of our society. The result is that Canada is less safe today than it was when the Liberals came into office. Numbers do not lie. Here are some statistics on how the situation has evolved since 2015. Violent crime is up 55%. Gun-related crime is up 130%.”
“Hung Trang and Ban Phuc Hoang were killed by a criminal released on bail in Edmonton. In Manitoba, a criminal killed his sister while out on bail. Out of respect for those victims and their families, Bill C‑14 needs to go further. We must do it for them, in their memory, to prevent further victimization. In his comments on violent repeat offenders in Winnipeg, Winnipeg mayor Scott Gillingham said that these figures confirm what frontline officers see every day, namely that it is always the same people who go through the justice system, committing violent crimes over and over again. After numerous warnings to this government, I am still a little perplexed. Conservatives on this side of the House have been asking Liberals to abandon their bail plan for years. Why did they wait so long?”
“Mr. Speaker, we are here today to speak to Bill C-14 , an act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the National Defence Act regarding bail and sentencing. Canadians have waited a long time for the Liberal government to take serious measures to end violence in communities across the country. Since 2015, this government has chosen to let violent offenders walk free rather than protect innocent Canadians. The reality is that there are now more dangerous criminals on our streets and in our communities, which are becoming less and less safe. Unfortunately, there are countless victims. Savannah Rose Kulla-Davies, a mother of four, was killed by a criminal released on bail in Brampton. Bailey McCourt was killed just three hours after a criminal was released on bail in Kelowna.”
“Mr. Speaker, what is the role of the Parliamentary Budget Officer? He plays a key role when it comes to the federal government's financial transparency. He provides members of Parliament with an independent, non-partisan analysis of the state of public finances. So what does he have to say about the Liberal budget? He says that the government's “overly broad” definition of capital investments creates a major discrepancy with its estimates. The government will have to abandon its fiscal anchor of reducing the deficit-to-GDP ratio. Does the Prime Minister recognize the work of the non-partisan parliamentary officer, or is he considering dismissing him?”
“Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague, Pierre‑Olivier Zappa, who is a leader in economics and finance, wrote an article about how the federal government is out of touch with reality. The minister is talking about the first nations when I am asking about luxury boats and planes. I do not understand her answer. Who decided to lower taxes on private jets and luxury yachts while our constituents are suffering and struggling? There is nothing for our seniors, nothing for our people. Who made that decision?”
“Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. Conservatives support lowering taxes so Canadians can have more money in their pockets. Do members know where the Liberals decided to cut taxes? I hope they are sitting down for this. They decided to cut taxes on private aircraft and luxury boats. This is not a joke. It is intended for the Liberals' friends. I encourage members to come to the grocery store with me, talk to single moms and seniors, and tell them that luxury boat owners will be getting a tax cut, not them at the grocery store.”
“Mr. Speaker, there is nothing in this budget for our seniors. Let me tell the House what is in this budget. Conservatives are in favour of cutting taxes. Where are the Liberals choosing to cut taxes? They are choosing to cut taxes on luxury boats and yachts instead of helping our seniors. That is what the Liberals are choosing to do. They will have to live with their choices.”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the way should be embarrassed to stand up here. He should be embarrassed to face his children and his grandchildren. We actually asked the Governor of the Bank of Canada about the G7 yesterday. I would invite the member to go listen to the testimony at the Standing Committee on Finance. We Conservatives are going to keep trying to put money back in the pockets of Canadians, who are currently struggling because of the Liberals' mismanagement.”
“It said it would be no more than $42 billion. Now it is $78 billion. The government is still spending recklessly. (1020) Rest assured, Mr. Speaker, that I will continue to analyze this budget and the public finances and that I will always be there for the people of Richmond—Arthabaska and for all Canadians.”
“Maintaining a declining debt-to-GDP ratio is no longer a priority for this government. The debt-to-GDP ratio continues to rise at a rate of almost 2%. This is simply irresponsible. The Liberal government no longer has any fiscal anchors. This is not a serious budget. We cannot live with such huge deficits. On our side of the House, we made proposals to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue , but he turned a deaf ear. For instance, we hoped to see the hidden taxes on food scrapped, the taxes on jobs reduced, housing built, money invested in energy, and the inflationary taxes eliminated. None of that is in the Liberals' 2025 budget. We asked the government to limit its deficit to $42 billion, as set out in its last budget update. It was not us who proposed that figure; the government put it in its last budget update.”
“Eventually, Canadian taxpayers always get stuck with the bill. We have to eliminate Liberal waste and clean house. That is what we are proposing, yet the Liberals persist in adding new programs and new structures. Take, for example, Build Canada Homes, a new development structure that was added. That is great. How many more public servants are being hired? Also, if we divide the total amount by the number of units the Liberals announced in their budget, we get a cost of $3.2 million per unit. At a price like the one proposed under the new Build Canada Homes program, I have no doubt that entrepreneurs will be lining up in Richmond—Arthabaska to offer their services. It is completely disproportionate. What concerns me is the continued waste and recklessness. The Liberal government has abandoned even its weak fiscal anchors.”
“The total amount of GST collected across the country in one year is $54.4 billion. This means that the total amount Canadians pay in GST across the country each year is not even equal to what is paid in interest on the debt. We cannot support a budget like this. The government keeps leading Canada down a path where taxpayers will have to hand over billions of dollars to bankers for decades. Over the past two days, I have spent about 10 hours studying this budget. I noticed that the government has announced about 12 new programs. It is one thing to come up with new programs, but I want to know which ineffective programs will be cut. Programs are being added, another layer is being added, but nothing is ever taken away. That is the Liberals for you. The government is adding programs, adding spending, adding bureaucracy and adding waste.”
“Interest on the debt currently sits at $55.6 billion and now exceeds the amount the government spends on the Canada health transfer for all provinces, which is $54.7 billion. Interest payments on the debt are costing more than all the money given to health care systems across the country. The government would rather take that money, throw it away and give it to the big bankers instead of investing it in our health care. The health care system is very important to my constituents, and I am certain that all Canadians feel the same way. Unfortunately, the government is spending less money on the health care system than it is on interest payments on the debt. It gets even crazier. On Thursdays, Canadians pay taxes on their paycheques, and every time they make a purchase, they pay more taxes, such as the GST.”
“Our party has been talking quite a lot about the fact that the current deficit means costs and sacrifices for future generations. After 10 years of Justin Trudeau's deficits, Canadians are paying the price, and the current Prime Minister's government is still the same government. Now let us look at the interest on the debt. It will be $55.6 billion for fiscal year 2025-26, and it will only continue to grow as hundreds of billions of dollars are added to the national debt over the next few years. The interest on the debt will be $60 billion in 2026-27, $66.2 billion in 2027-28, $71.4 billion in 2028-29, and in excess of $76 billion in 2029-30. At this point, I am certain that it will keep rising and it will be even more catastrophic. (1015) Allow me to put this into context.”