Bob Zimmer
Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, British Columbia · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, as we can hear from my Quebec colleagues, obviously that was not a good answer to the member's question. Liberal government documents confirm that nearly 18% of the firearms being confiscated by the Liberal gun grab are .22-calibre rifles, often used to hunt gophers or to shoot pop cans.”
“Mr. Speaker, I know third party advertising and the involvement of foreign governments in our elections is a big problem. It reared its head back in 2015. I am sure the member remembers back in the day. This is a headline from 2017: “Controversial Leadnow active in B.C. politics, Vancouver city affairs”.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his great work across this country on Bill C-9 . Maybe there are some well-intentioned Liberals across the way, but we made these same arguments around medical assistance in dying.”
“Mr. Speaker, that was another non-answer. Joseph Murdoch-Flowers, executive director of the Qajuqturvik Community Food Centre in Iqaluit, said this week that the centre has seen its daily meal count go from around 58,000 in 2022 to almost 91,000 last year. It has served 37,000 meals so far this year in a town of 7,500 people.”
“Madam Speaker, I just want to bring up to the member across the way that his government has been in power for the last 11 years, and the Northwest Territories should be one of the powerful cylinders in our economic engine, but it is seriously misfiring.”
“This is what the preamble to Bill S-233 says: Whereas there are an increasing number of incidents involving violence against persons who provide health services and first responders; Whereas assaults on persons who provide health services and first responders have both a physical and a psychological impact; And whereas persons who provide…”
The complete record
Every one of 141 lines we hold for Bob Zimmer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 3.
“I think what indigenous communities are looking forward to when a Conservative government takes office is that we will actually get things done.”
“Mr. Speaker, the shadow minister and I serve on INAN together, the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs. We have served on that committee for several years now. We often see Liberals trying to look busy. They try to look like they are getting something done. Indigenous communities have heard only hollow and empty promises without any delivery. Then Liberals stand up today in the House as if they are finally going to get going on all the things they have been promising. They have been in government for 10 years, and still there is nothing, a big goose egg in terms of a modern treaty. Despite what the member said, talking endlessly in the chamber, there really is not much there in what he says.”
“Mr. Speaker, all I would say is similar to what I said before. There are already agencies that have been established. The Auditor General has done many reports, as I said in my speech. There are already mechanisms in the country, in the government for that matter, and the bureaucracy to actually get the things done. Establishing a separate, whole other bureaucracy once again would only make it look like it is doing something when it really would not be doing anything.”
“Mr. Speaker, it really comes down to building bureaucracy versus building actually real things and getting real things done. I think there has been ten years' worth of examples. Even just recently, there was a supposed housing announcement in Ontario, but it was all a big facade. There was not anything actually there. It is something that the government created. The government is great at building facades and building bureaucracy. Again, first nations, Inuit and Métis communities are looking for it to actually get things done.”
“For many indigenous governments, treaty implementation has meant delays. Departments apply treaty commitments inconsistently, and fiscal transfers are often structured to preserve federal control rather than empower indigenous economy. Last, what Canadians and first nations communities, Métis and Inuit have seen for far too long is that the government is great at building bureaucracy but is not really great at getting things done.”
“What we need are ministers and officials who take on the responsibilities and obligations they already have, whether with respect to modern treaties, self-government provisions or historical agreements. Since the 1970s, Canada has pursued modern treaties to move beyond the numbered treaties of the past. These comprehensive agreements establish self-government, define resource rights and confirm judicial authority. Today, over two dozen modern treaties are in force across Canada, from Yukon to Nunavut, British Columbia, Quebec and Labrador. These agreements represent some of the most advanced models of indigenous government in the world, yet the reality is uneven. Others remain mired in administrative barriers, forced to renegotiate and litigate rights they believed were secure.”
“Between 2015 and 2017, they created several new entities to address land claim implementation issues: the modern treaties implementation office, the assessment of modern treaty implications office, the performance management framework, the modern treaty management environment, the deputy ministers' oversight committee and the reconciliation secretariat. Despite these six entities, no modern treaties have been finalized. The six entities are specifically designed to monitor, support and ensure the implementation of treaties. Are we to believe that a seventh entity, the commissioner for modern treaty implementation, would be the solution? Perhaps the answer lies not in creating more agencies but in holding accountable those who failed to fulfill their existing duties. It is time to start firing those who fall short.”
“Now we hear of a new commissioner for modern treaty implementation, which would be a multi-million dollar bureaucracy tasked with monitoring, overseeing and reporting on implementation. It would not be accountable to Parliament. The commissioner, alongside the government and treaty partners, would decide when and how audits are conducted, leaving Parliament without the authority to initiate reviews of the government's handling of modern treaties. Reports would be tabled weeks after the minister receives them, further eroding accountability. With respect, this is the wrong approach. To negotiate modern treaties, we do not need another commissioner, another office and more bureaucrats. The Liberals should learn from their past mistakes.”
“Since 2015, the Auditor General has also produced 14 other reports on related issues facing first nations, Inuit and Métis communities. While the government continues to ignore the Office of Auditor General's reports and audits and continues to ignore treaty partners, it had the impertinence in 2023 to propose a collaborative modern treaty implementation policy. This might seem like progress, especially with 70 treaty negotiations currently stalled, but two years later, the policy remains unimplemented. The critical point is this: Implementation is not about new policies, new offices or new spending. It is about whether current officials fulfill their responsibilities, whether existing departments are held accountable, and whether existing laws and commitments are enforced.”
“Who has been held responsible for these failures? How has the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations addressed this debacle internally? Would a report from a new commissioner's office change anything when dozens of Auditor General reports on the government's mishandling of indigenous affairs have been ignored? (1525) The Office of the Auditor General has conducted regular audits on treaty negotiations, modern treaties, self-government agreements and treaty land entitlements. These include the 2005 report on meeting treaty land entitlement obligations, the 2006 report on federal participation in the British Columbia treaty process, the comprehensive 2013 “Audit of the Implementation of Modern Treaty Obligations” and the 2016 report 3, “Implementing the Labrador Inuit land Claims Agreement”.”
“Former prime minister Harper and the Conservative government negotiated five modern treaties in just six years: the Tlicho first nation's land claims and self-government agreement in 2006, the Maa-nulth First Nations Final Agreement in 2009, the Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement in 2009, the Sioux Valley Dakota Nation Governance Agreement in 2013 and the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement in 2015. In contrast, over the past decade, the Liberals have not negotiated a single modern treaty. Let me be clear. The Conservatives wholeheartedly support modern treaties. We stand with indigenous communities seeking to break free from the outdated Indian Act. What we cannot support is the misguided belief that spending more taxpayer dollars compensates for a lack of accountability within government bureaucracy.”
“Legally, self-government provisions are binding and implemented under federal law. They can exist as part of a modern treaty or as a stand-alone self-government agreement. This distinction is vital. Implementation is not about creating new offices or adding layers of bureaucracy. It is about ensuring the Crown and its departments respect the legal authority already established in these agreements. Consider, for example, the Whitecap Dakota self-government agreement, which passed with Conservative support in 2023. This is not a full modern treaty and outstanding issues remain, issues that I understand the government continues to delay. I ask, then, exactly how a future commissioner of modern treaty implementation would magically motivate the government to resolve these matters. As we have heard before, we know progress is possible.”
“These agreements resolve long-standing disputes over land ownership, resource rights and governance within a defined territory. The scope of a modern treaty includes land, resources, financial compensation and governance rights, and it often incorporates self-government provisions. However, not all modern treaties are full self-government agreements. Once implemented, modern treaties carry the weight of federal law, typically replacing or clarifying rights under historic treaties. A self-government treaty, often embedded within a modern treaty, recognizes an indigenous government's authority to make laws over areas such as education, health, culture and local services, with powers akin to those of municipal or provincial governments. The scope focuses on political authority and administrative powers rather than on only land or resources.”
“This new treaty commissioner would tell us nothing that the Auditor General and countless indigenous leaders have not already made clear: that the government continues to fail indigenous peoples. Today, I will speak plainly about the state of modern treaty implementation in Canada, what progress we have seen, what failures persist and how we can address these challenges without piling on more costly bureaucracy at a time when Canadians can scarcely afford it. However, before I discuss implementation, let me clarify what is meant by modern treaties and self-government agreements. A modern treaty is a comprehensive land claims agreement negotiated between a first nation, Inuit or Métis group and the Crown, meaning the federal government and sometimes provincial governments.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong . I rise today to address a matter at the heart of our nation's identity: the relationship between the Crown and indigenous peoples. The relationship is grounded not merely in history but in honour. Its strength is proven not by grand speeches or new offices but by actions, by the promises we keep and by the commitments we fulfill. For many years, we have preached reconciliation, yet without accountability, reconciliation remains a hollow promise, an unfulfilled vow that betrays the trust of our indigenous partners. The Liberal government's proposed Bill C-10 , an act respecting the commissioner for modern treaty implementation, is little more than a distraction. It is a bureaucratic shield to obscure a decade of broken promises to indigenous peoples.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised to negotiate a win with President Trump by July 21. There is still no win and still no deal. Because the Prime Minister failed to negotiate a deal, U.S. tariffs on Canadian softwood jumped to 35% this summer, and next week, they will jump to 45%. Since 2015, in B.C., 29 mills have closed and we have lost over 68,000 jobs. For the sake of all British Columbians, will the Prime Minister finally get a deal done and end U.S. tariffs on softwood lumber?”
“Mr. Speaker, I quote the Vancouver Sun, from February 25, 2025: “Just weeks after former Abbotsford gangster Jarrod Bacon was arrested in a shooting in [Fort Nelson,] B.C., the charge against him has been dropped.” Witnesses against him simply do not feel safe. Ben Wall, from Fort Nelson, had nine pieces of equipment destroyed. His shop was burned to the ground. Organized crime has set up shop in Fort Nelson, and people in Fort Nelson do not feel safe. The member made a great speech. Would the bill make people feel safe in Fort Nelson once again?”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition calling on the government to not cause Christian churches to lose their charitable status. The petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to reject recommendation 430 of the FINA pre-budget report, reaffirm Canada's commitment to an open culture and support each citizen's freedom to promote the common good through the advancement of religion without punitive financial measures. Christian churches should not lose their charitable status under the government.”
“Mr. Speaker, the public safety minister , while speaking to his tenant about the Liberal gun confiscation program, said, “Don't ask me to explain the logic to you on this.” His tenant said, “But we're not the problem”. The minister's tenant is 100% correct. Canadians know that hunters, sport shooters and other law-abiding gun owners are not the problem, but under the minister, gun crime is up 130%, with illegal guns being smuggled in through his leaky border. Will the Prime Minister finally fire the minister today for not keeping Canadians safe?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised lower grocery prices. “Canadians will hold us to account by their experience at the grocery store”, he said. In my travels to northern communities this summer, this is what I saw: In Tuktoyaktuk, a can of Alpha-getti is $6.79, a jug of milk is $14.79 and a 900-gram jar of Cheez Whiz is $17.29. In Cambridge Bay, a can of baked beans is $9.99, a 1.5-litre bottle of ketchup is $19.88 and a box of soup crackers is $22.99. Lastly, in Iqaluit, a can of mushroom soup is $10.19, a gallon of ice cream is $25 and a can of Tim Hortons, get this folks, is $48.89. If northerners' experience at the grocery store is the measure of the Prime Minister 's success, then he has been an abysmal failure.”
“It is a little rich for the member to say to the House and to Canadians, “Hey, we are going to do better now.” You have had a chance to fix things over the last 10 years. You have actually made things a lot worse, with the drug crisis you have caused on the city streets that has caused this new rise in crime. I frankly do not believe a word you are saying about how you are actually going to fix—”
“Madam Speaker, to me it is rich when I hear the secretary of state across the way say it is a “new government”. The Liberals have been in government for the last decade, and under their watch, crime waves have gone across the country. This is from Dawson Creek, the small town where I was born in northern B.C.: “The City of Dawson Creek recognizes that there has been an increase in shootings in our community over the last few weeks.” This is a rural town where normally shootings are something we never see. We are seeing it in Fort Nelson. We are seeing it in Prince George, as my colleague from Cariboo—Prince George has already said. I just think it is rich that you would say that you are a “new government”. In 10 years, you had a chance to fix things. Alexandra Mendès: The hon. member. Bob Zimmer: Yes, through you, Madam Speaker.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member has been an advocate for getting hard drugs off the streets. He has been to my riding, to Fort St. John, to talk specifically about this really challenging issue for our communities in B.C. The Liberal government is in its 11th year of governing this country. It has attacked law-abiding firearms owners on a regular basis, as the member mentioned. It has also allowed drugs to flow onto the streets, which, as he mentioned, have killed thousands of Canadians as a result of overdoses. Is the member confident that the Liberal government, in its 11th year of governing Canada, is about to change its ways?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a great question. Again, there is this mirage that the Quebec member spoke about. All of a sudden, this guy who is supposed to be a responsible spender of taxpayer dollars is not. I just mentioned how he is going to spend dramatically more than what the irresponsible Trudeau government already spent in the previous 10 years. Is that even possible? Yes, it is, because they are going to do it. Under Trudeau's plan, the federal debt interest would have reached a projected $66.3 billion in 2029, compared to $68.7 billion under the new Prime Minister 's plan. That is the truth. Regardless of how he is accounting and fudging the numbers, or whatever process he is trying to do, he is spending more. Canadians cannot afford it, and we need a change in government, bottom line.”
“Mr. Speaker, this is not what Canadians expected, even the ones who would say, “Take our carbon tax dollars.” The carbon tax has not gone away, by the way, for all the Canadians watching. We are waiting to see what this new industrial carbon tax is going to be. We know what the Prime Minister has set as the standard to truly cause change. It is in his book. He has said it many times. It is going to be a lot higher than it was under former prime minister Trudeau. In talking about the mirage, absolutely, it is. I see it in a different way. I see it as a costume that is wearing thin. We are starting to see the wolf that is in that sheep's costume appear. We are seeing it happen quickly. I really hope, for the sake of all Canadians, that he really does what he says he is going to do and develops us into this economic and energy superpower.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would argue that the platform the hon. member ran on was the one that was actually the Conservative platform. The thing of it is that Canadians are going to be watching whether the Prime Minister is actually going to follow through on this pro-Conservative, developing-the-economy type of language. We have already seen a few holes form, and his costume is wearing thin. I think what Canadians really wanted was to see a change from the previous 10 years of the last Liberal government. What we are seeing and what they are seeing is that there has been no change at all, just the same radical, anti-development Liberals.”
“The Prime Minister is desperately trying to pretend to be different than the last Liberal leader, Justin Trudeau, but he handpicked the most radical and corrupt minister from the old Trudeau government to be in his cabinet. They are both now taking Canada further down a radically dangerous road of massive debt, corruption and economic destruction. Again, as Solomon once said, “A mirror reflects a man's face, but what he is really like is shown by the kind of friends he chooses.” Indeed, Canadians are seeing that the Prime Minister is the company he keeps.”
“member: Oh, oh! Bob Zimmer: Mr. Speaker, I hear heckling across the way from the member for Winnipeg, but the truth hurts, I guess. I will finish with this: A recent article called “[Prime Minister] poised to dethrone Trudeau as biggest spender in Canadian history” reads: under [the Prime Minister]'s plan, this year’s deficit will increase to a projected $62.4 billion while the combined deficits over the subsequent three years will be $67.7 billion higher than under Trudeau’s plan. Consequently, the federal debt, and debt interest costs, will rise sharply. Under Trudeau’s plan, federal debt interest would have reached a projected $66.3 billion in 2028/29 compared to $68.7 billion under the new [Prime Minister's] plan. That is a lot higher, for sure.”
“It is just as impossible, I would argue, for two enviro-radicals to change their views on energy development in Canada. I think Conservative voters saw that. We saw the wolf in sheep's clothing that the current Prime Minister is, but I digress. Some Canadians believe what the Prime Minister had to say, and I think it is our job to prove that what he said was not true. If the PM is changing the course of the last disastrous decade, why would he pick the most radical minister from the last Trudeau government to be in his inner circle in his new Liberal government? It is because the secret is getting out, and the new Liberal government really is not new at all. It is the same old same old. The same radical, anti-development Liberals we saw ruin our economy under Trudeau are now putting their foot on the gas under the Prime Minister . An hon.”
“Let's choose [the new Prime Minister]!” I will share another quote about the Prime Minister by the corrupt minister: “He's all in...[The new Prime Minister] is the right person for Canada's future and this is why I am supporting him as the next leader of the Liberal Party”. Again, what does it say when a known radical chooses the Prime Minister to be the leader of the party? I think it begs a lot of questions for Canadians out there. Here is a Prime Minister who says that, all of a sudden, he has seen the light. He is going to build pipelines and turn Canada into an energy superpower. Meanwhile, he is fully aligned with radicals such as the former environment minister, the current Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture . We all know the phrase that it is impossible for a leopard to change their spots.”
“Similarly, why would the radical former minister choose the new Liberal leader, who is so pro-energy development and no longer a radical? Again, the current Prime Minister sold a bill of goods to most people. He took most of the Conservative platform and said, “this is what I am going to be now if I am the Prime Minister in the new Liberal government.” Then why would a radical minister support him in his leadership bid and in his bid to become the next Prime Minister? I will share a quote from the current Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture : “[The current Prime Minister] is the leader we need to build Canada's future...Let's choose Canada.”
“The minister also owned shares in a company that benefited from the green slash fund to the tune of $250 million. The minister refuses to say what the value of those shares is, and caused Parliament to be in gridlock just before the last election because of that. Most of us know this, but I will remind Canadians today that, while he was minister of the environment, he gave another three-quarters of a billion dollars to the same green slush fund to, again, be given to friends and Liberal supporters. (2020) The puzzling thing to me, and I think to a lot of Canadians who watched the choice of the new Prime Minister and his cabinet, was why the PM would choose this obviously corrupt former minister to be in his new cabinet.”
“Getting back to the minister, the article continues with a “partial list of his former employers and clients”, which includes Equiterre, a Montreal-based environmental organization; Greenpeace Canada; and Greenpeace International. He was also a consultant and shareholder in “Cycle Capital, a Quebec company that received as much as $250 million in Green Slush Fund money.” Again, this does not sound to me like a minister who is all of a sudden going to be pro Canada's being an energy superpower, and I do not think it sounds like that to most Canadians watching tonight. Here is a quick recap of the record of corruption of the former Trudeau environment minister, current Canadian culture minister : The minister was a lobbyist for a company that benefited from the green slash fund to the tune of $250 million.”
“In 2001 he scaled Toronto’s CN Tower, unfurling a banner that read “Canada and Bush Climate Killers.” The following year he led activists in an assault on the home of Alberta premier, Ralph Klein. They managed to erect a fake solar panel on the roof and scare Klein’s wife, Colleen, who was home at the time. It sounds to me like he is a radical. The article continues, saying that by 2016-17, the minister “was helping engineer the demise of Trans Canada’s Energy East Pipeline”. Again, this is a minister who does not sound like he is a supporter of Canada's being an energy superpower. As well, I will be splitting my time with the member for Elmwood—Transcona .”
“Remember, this is the same radical environment minister who was in charge of the green slush fund, who saw 400 million of taxpayer dollars go to Liberal insiders and his friends. Do people trust this minister to spend their money properly this time? Let us have a quick look at who the former minister of the environment, current Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture , is. A recent article by Jim Warren states: An intriguing detail to emerge in the House of Commons Committee proceedings is that Environment and Climate Change Canada minister...holds a beneficial interest in Cycle Capital, a Quebec-based venture capital firm that received tens of millions in SDTC grants.... [The minister] first came to the attention [of] environmentalists across Canada and internationally for performing a couple of infamous media stunts.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are the company we keep. The Prime Minister , who is desperately trying to rebrand himself and his Liberal government as being new, responsible, pro-energy and non-radical, picked the most radical and corrupt minister from the Trudeau government, who oversaw the most corruption and debt in Canadian history, to be in his Liberal cabinet. Solomon said, “A mirror reflects a man’s face, but what he is really like is shown by the kind of friends he chooses.” The new Prime Minister chose the old environment minister who was in charge of the green slush fund and put him in his new Liberal cabinet. As I just said, now the former environment minister, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture , wants approval tonight in the estimates to spend $253 million more of hard-earned taxpayer dollars.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member and I worked together on the former ethics committee. Would he agree that a closure motion is more of an autocratic type action, or is it democratic? I would like to clarify with the Liberal government whether it is autocratic in nature, or democratic, with this action?”
“Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that the member for Winnipeg North just got up and said our Canadian economy is on the rocks. Guess which government has been in power for the last 10 years. It is his government. The part that I think is more difficult for Canadians watching today is that they were sold a bill of goods. This was supposed to be a new prime minister and a new government, but the government is doing exactly what the previous government did for the last 10 years. When it did not get its way, it would ram things through the Parliament. Please, for all Canadians, explain how the current government is different from the last 10 years of the last Trudeau government.”
“Mr. Speaker, that answer does not cut it for Canadians struggling to pay their bills in record numbers. These old Liberals have turned arrive scam into a master class in rewarding failure and corruption. The old ministers responsible for this scam are the same old ministers sitting over there as cabinet ministers right now. These same old ministers are ignoring the rules, allowing their insiders to get rich with taxpayers' hard-earned money. Why do corrupt Liberal ministers keep getting promoted, while Canadians keep getting the bill?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General released a scathing audit this week on the top arrive scam contractor, GC Strategies. This two-person company, under RCMP investigation, received a jaw-dropping $64 million from the Liberals. The old ministers responsible for this all got promoted by the Prime Minister and are sitting as ministers right there, right now. Canadians are incensed by these same old Liberal ministers continuing in their corrupt ways. A simple question for the Prime Minister, when are Canadians going to get their money back?”
“Mr. Speaker, last night, our Conservative motion passed demanding a budget from the Prime Minister this spring. After a decade of Liberal delay and decline in Northwest Territories, its economy is in trouble. Since 2015, mining, quarrying and oil and gas extraction are down 16%, construction is down 43% and the energy sector is down 54%. Economist Graeme Clinton said that as the mines close over the next three to eight years and nothing replaces them, “we can expect a much smaller economy than we have today.” The Northwest Territories cannot afford any more of the Prime Minister 's empty promises. What is his plan?”