Luc Berthold
Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière, Quebec · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, let me thank the member for Saint‑Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton for his remarks and for the years he has spent serving the people of his riding.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canada is a country of lakes, mountains and rivers. Sadly, more and more anglers, paddlers and boaters fear they will lose access to Quebec's lakes. While public access points are disappearing or becoming prohibitively expensive, the Liberals are looking the other way and leaving local authorities to fend for themselves.”
“Mr. Speaker, during question period, the Leader of the Government in the House made derogatory comments about one of our members. I have to say that any seat one occupies here in the House is just as important as any other, and I would invite him to apologize to all—”
“Mr. Speaker, they want us to applaud them for putting a bandage over a wound they created. That is the issue. I have a message for the Prime Minister , who is at the G7. I also have a message for this minister.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Prime Minister will attend the G7 summit today as the only leader to have led his country into a recession. Full-time workers are living in RVs because they can no longer afford housing.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be here today to ask this long-awaited question, as my colleague the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons would say. As we know, millions of Canadians look forward to this every week. I have even heard that people in France are waiting for this moment. Apparently, we are quite popular.”
The complete record
Every one of 291 lines we hold for Luc Berthold, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 6.
“Mr. Speaker, I was quoting the Leader of the Opposition who was reiterating what the Prime Minister said, and that is that a country that cannot feed itself has few options. Well, food inflation has doubled under his watch, and it is the worst in the G7. Groceries will cost the average family an almost unimaginable $17,600 this year. That is after-tax money. As a result, today's motion is absolutely essential to give families a break so that they are not afraid to go grocery shopping. Right now, families are going grocery shopping with a calculator in hand. They are putting products back on the shelves. They are wondering which bills will go unpaid so that the fridge will not be empty. What is the government doing while Canadians are making impossible choices?”
“He said: Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my excellent colleague from Oshawa . I will quote the Leader of the Opposition who said, “This Liberal government doesn't just leave people behind. It prices and shuts out youth from homes, workers from jobs, and families from groceries.” That is the theme of today's opposition motion. I will continue quoting Mr. Poilievre, who talks about the Prime Minister . The Prime Minister said that a country that cannot—”
“Motion moved: That, given that the finance minister promised in October 2023 that food prices would stabilize "soon" and that the Prime Minister stated in May 2025 that he would be judged by the prices at the grocery store, and that, (i) Canadians face the highest food inflation in the G7, (ii) food inflation is twice as high as it was when the Prime Minister took office, (iii) food inflation in Canada is twice as high as it is in the United States, (iv) Canadians made 2.2 million visits a month to food banks, (v) food bank use has more than doubled since the Liberals took power, the House call on the government to immediately introduce a Food Affordability Plan that: (a) removes the Liberals' hidden taxes on food, including, (i) the industrial carbon tax on farm equipment, fertilizer, and food processors, that drives up the costs of producing food and are passed onto consumers, (ii) the fuel standards tax, which is seven cents a litre and rising to 17 cents a litre on farmers, truckers, and those who bring us our food, (iii) the food packaging tax that will cost Canadians $1.3 billion; and (b) boosts competition in our overly-concentrated grocery sector.”
“Mr. Speaker, I was talking about the price of champagne. [ Translation ] This minister said that prices would stabilize. Why did he fail to mention that, for him, stabilizing prices meant that they would become increasingly more expensive until they were double what they are in the United States? This is the most expensive food inflation in the G7. Why do these people never put their money where their mouth is?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been in office for almost a year now, and despite his lofty rhetoric, fewer and fewer Quebeckers have enough money to pay rent. As a matter of fact, 20% of Quebeckers admitted having managed to pay their monthly rent on time at least once. In central Quebec, my region, it is nearly 30%. In Montreal, it is one in four renters. The Prime Minister promised to get things done at a pace not seen since World War II. Can he tell us why the only things moving quickly are rising rents and rising grocery prices?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am thinking of the consultants, the bureaucracy, the corporate welfare. Not a single one of those members is standing up to defend the words of the Prime Minister , who told Canadians they would judge him on the cost of groceries. Those were his words. Now 36% of Quebeckers are experiencing food insecurity. The food banks in Quebec are receiving three million visits a month. The Prime Minister's wealthy friends do not have to worry because they do not have to skip any meals. They get to eat their fill. He promised to lower the cost of food. He misled Canadians. Will he finally keep his word and stop spending so much money so that everyone can eat?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister , sitting just a few feet away from me, has made this personal. He told Canadians that they should judge him by the price of groceries. No matter what excuses all the other Liberals come up with today, the Prime Minister was the one who set the bar on how to judge him. Not only has he failed miserably, but next year's grocery bill is going to cost the average family $1,000 more. Why is the Prime Minister misleading Canadians as they line up at food banks in growing numbers because of his inflationary spending?”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about courage, but I am talking about resilience. I am here, we are here, and we did not ask to be here. We are going through this like many parents are. I can say that many parents have gone through these trials since this happened to us, but they do not have the privilege that I have, as a member of Parliament, to be able to talk about it and raise awareness. I am not yet ready to talk about specific amounts. I mentioned that in my speech: There are so many disparities between the different provinces that everything will not be solved with a wave of a magic wand. However, we must send a signal that we are going to take care of it.”
“Mr. Speaker, the purpose of Bill C-231 is to enable judges to get young people into treatment, but also to remind judges and the entire justice system that treatments are available and that a young drug user is not necessarily a criminal. A young drug user may be someone suffering from an undiagnosed or undetected mental illness. Drugs become the remedy that society has failed to provide to these young people. I am convinced that if we can intervene as soon as possible, before young people start using fentanyl or harder drugs, as was the case with David, then we can turn their lives around. That is why we must not wait until young people are in the justice system as repeat offenders before offering them the chance to get treated. We have to intervene as soon as possible.”
“Mr. Speaker, everything we can do as a House to improve the lives of our children, everything we can do to improve this bill and make it more effective for our children, I am open to hearing about. I cannot be alone in this fight. I need all of my colleagues to be part of this, to show young people in this country that the House cares about them.”
“Bill C-231 is also a special tribute to one of David's friends who also took his own life shortly after David did because he was unable to overcome his grief and his demons. I am asking my esteemed colleagues to make this small change for all the friends of David, all those who suffer in silence, who seek solace and answers in drugs and who may not have access to the care they need. Let us do it so that the justice system can force the hand of all government bodies so that young people finally have access to help. I need my fellow members to talk openly about addiction, to be part of the solution for all the friends of David across the country. On behalf of David, my wife Caro and my entire family, I am asking all members to support Bill C-231.”
“Why then do we send them to youth addiction centres without giving them treatment for their mental injuries? The consequences of doing nothing are serious. For our family, for my wife and me, Bill C-231 could perhaps have made a big difference for our son, David, who took his own life on February 10, 2025, leaving our grandsons fatherless and his partner a widow far too early. We still miss him terribly. Even though with time, we have come to better understand everything that my son went though, we will never understand the terrible thing he did to himself and to those he loved. We are angry at the system for not helping him. We are angry at society for not facing up to its responsibilities, and we are angry at ourselves for failing to take action.”
“There are waiting lists while private treatment centres are costly and prohibitively expensive for young people and their families. These young people are already ruined financially due to addiction while their parents are burdened with the substantial financial toll of their children's addiction. There are immense challenges and time is running out. I know full well that Bill C-231 will be but a drop in the ocean in the world of narcotics, but we know we have to start somewhere. A good starting point is recognizing that the Youth Criminal Justice Act should not treat all young addicts as offenders but as people who are sick and cannot take care of themselves. A judge would never send a young person streaked in blood to prison first before sending them to hospital to have their injuries treated.”
“What is missing is simple. Drug addiction must be recognized for what it is: a mental health problem. Drug addiction is a mental health problem like any other health problem and it can be treated. I am not saying it can be cured. I am saying that people with addiction, particularly young people, should have access to treatment as early as possible in their addiction journey in order to treat their illness before it takes over their entire lives. It should also be just as easy to access treatment as it is for drug users to get access to drugs. I can personally attest to the fact that this is not the case. It is hard to get access to health professionals. Sometimes, there are months-long wait times to get an appointment with a psychologist, a psychiatrist or physician. Public treatment programs are not available in all regions.”
“I found this reassuring, but also worrying, given the discussions we had around the table. I can say right off the bat that no one felt I was heading in the wrong direction with Bill C-231 for David's friends. The World Health Organization defines addiction as “an uncontrollable urge to consume a substance (alcohol or drugs) and a tendency to increase the dose, resulting in a psychological and sometimes physical dependency. The continuation of the abusive use of substances has adverse effects on the physical, emotional, social and economic health of individuals and their families.” (1110) I find that definition too simplistic, and unfortunately, it is often used to guide health decisions around the world. It defines addiction by its consequences on people with addiction, so it is a definition of the effects of addiction.”
“I think the answer to that question alone is worth more than all the statistics I could have spent 10 minutes rattling off to demonstrate the scope of the problem we are facing. In any event, the statistics do not exist. I tried to find out more about the number of drug users who are minors, the treatments available to them, the number of admissions, the number of relapses following treatment, but it is like the Tower of Babel. Each province has its own program, its own methods for managing addiction. Some provinces perform very well, others not well at all. Additionally, in preparing my speech for today, I wanted to know whether I was on the wrong track. I am not a doctor, and my wife is not a social worker, so I organized a round table with representatives from the Canadian Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health.”
“I could have filled my speech with statistics on the number of young people who use drugs, drugs of all types. I could have talked about the alarming figures on fentanyl, which is ravaging our major cities. I could have talked about the number of overdoses, which kill thousands of young adults every year. I do not need to provide numbers. I am simply asking people to open their eyes and see what is happening around us, especially with homelessness and drug use in the streets and near schools. Once that image is clear in their minds, I ask them to imagine that it is their child. Would they too hope that society could have intervened on that child's behalf at an age when it was still possible to make a difference?”
“By passing Bill C-231, MPs will send a message to David's friends that drug use that leads to addiction is not just another crime, but rather an illness that can be treated with appropriate care. Bill C‑231 for David's friends is not reinventing the wheel. The adult criminal justice system already allows judges to reserve their sentence after imposing an addiction treatment program. Why not open this possibility to minors, for whom early treatment could change their whole lives, before they turn to crime as a way to afford their damn drugs? The House can send a message to thousands of young Canadians who are still minors that their country cares about them and that they can count on their elected representatives to pave the way toward a happy future free from the clutches of addiction.”
“Most importantly, we want to prevent minors from turning to crime to support their addiction by becoming drug dealers in order to have the means to afford the remedy that society has been unable to give them. By passing Bill C-231, MPs will send a clear message to judges that drug treatment should be a priority. By passing Bill C-231, MPs will send a clear message to law enforcement that when a young person is brought before a judge, it is not to punish them, but rather to offer them a way out so they can heal. By passing Bill C-231, MPs will be sending a clear message to people in the educational system that action needs to be taken rather than turning a blind eye and doing nothing in the hopes that it is just a passing phase.”
“The current law allows a judge to order a young person into an intensive support and supervision program. That is what the law says. However, it does not specifically mention drug treatment programs. After consulting with police officers, I realized that many of them do not want to prosecute young people who are struggling with substance abuse. They feel that a slap on the wrist, the police showing up, that is enough. That slap on the wrist no longer really hurts, however, and police officers often feel that the justice system will not really help these young people anyway. However, in my opinion, the opposite should happen. This bill will encourage young people to recover from their addiction, rather than punishing them for being addicted.”
“(1105) The police and prosecutors now rarely arrest and charge young people for drug possession. Marijuana is legal, there is a high burden of proof and the justice system is overwhelmed. The parents of David's friends are left to fend for themselves while the friends of David have no idea where they are headed. That is why my wife and I are calling on my colleagues to support Bill C-231 for the friends of David. This is a straightforward bill. It gives the police and judges additional options when a young person is arrested and taken to court under the Youth Criminal Justice Act. The bill would allow them to refer the youth to an addiction treatment program, delay sentencing until after the end of the addiction treatment and take into account the youth's compliance with the program at final sentencing.”
“The parents of the David' friends are not blind. They can clearly see that something is off. However, it is not always as obvious as one might think. Many people think it is just a passing phase that kids go through. We choose not to see the small changes taking place in our kids' lives. Over time, the parents of the David's friends get more concerned and they look for help from family physicians, special education teachers at school, social workers, anonymous help lines or friends who have gone through similar situations. I think any of these are good actions. Everyone involved needs to face a difficult reality: If a teen refuses to listen, fails to acknowledge they have a problem or is unable to face reality, those wanting to help are left with no option but to step back and leave them to their own devices.”
“Does the health system have the tools to deal with the reality of these young people? These are questions that keep running through our minds. That brings me back to Bill C‑231. Can minors be compelled to undergo treatment? When students turn 14, schools are not allowed to call the parents to discuss their health issues, but they can call the police to have them arrested. The police can arrest minors and take them before a judge for illegal possession of drugs. If the minors appear before a judge, they will almost always be sent back to school with a slap on the wrist without anyone trying to understand how they got into this situation in the first place. The bottom line is that we treat the wound without looking at the story behind it. We tend to dress the visible wound and neglect the more critical injuries.”
“Some young people have no idea, when they take their first puff , that one day they will not be able to manage without it. It will not be enough, and they will become addicted for the rest of their lives. It is for this handful of young people who will not figure this out until it is too late that we decided to act. Our first action, while we are still mourning David's death, is this bill, which seeks to change things and give those young people a chance to have a future. Here are some of the questions the parents of David's friends are asking themselves. How can we change things? What went wrong? What did we miss as parents? Are the schools we entrust with educating our children and preparing them to become adults doing a good job? Do we want to help these youth or punish them so as not to “contaminate” others around them?”
“The story of David and his friends is the story of young people who, as teenagers, discover in drugs a way to hide their profound unhappiness. Using drugs just for fun becomes the doctor they did not see, the medications they did not take, the solution society was not able to offer them. Let me be clear: A young man using marijuana for fun with his friends once in a while is not a lost cause. Kids will be kids, as the saying goes, and an occasional joint has not prevented the majority of young people from going on to have a good life, build a successful career, and find happiness. I am not some old fogey who thinks that banning everything is the only way to make the world better. Everyone who goes through an ordeal like this agrees that a joint from time to time does not hurt anyone. However, that is not true for everyone.”
“We will never know his full story because the illness he may have been suffering from was never diagnosed. It was covered up by all the drugs and substances he had to take to remain the David who was not afraid of anything, but who was always anxious when it came time to take action. Yes, Bill C-231 is very personal for me and my wife. It is not easy for us to talk about David in front of everyone, putting on display our weaknesses and his, our life and what our life might have been. We decided to do it anyway, because if we are silent, there will be other Davids, other parents who will not know what to do, other children who will grow up without their father, and other wives who must go on without their husband.”
“Although we continue to mourn his untimely passing, my wife Caro and I decided that, rather than standing idly by, we should try to do our small part to help those who I call David's friends, all the young teenagers who, at some point, gave in to the temptation of drugs. My heart is broken because I do not know whether I should tell David's story. He was a bright young man who was always willing to lend a hand, as well as a protective older brother to his two younger sisters. He was curious and strong, always wanting to try everything for himself, thinking that he would always remain in control of his decisions and that he could try everything without any consequences for himself or others. He was an addict. Despite how confident he seemed, he always needed someone or something to help him get through the day.”
“moved that Bill C‑231, An Act to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act , be read the second time and referred to a committee. Bill C‑231. Second reading He said: Mr. Speaker, it is with a broken heart that I rise in the House today for the second reading of my private member's bill, the friends of David bill, to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act. I am heartbroken because, as the name suggests, I am doing this for the friends of my son David, who is no longer with us today. This bill is not going to change anything about his own journey, the choices he made or the great void he leaves behind.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. [ English ] That is because Bill C-15 is a smokescreen. There is nothing in it for real people, for people from rural communities or for people who are unable to pay their bills at the end of the month. That is why Bill C-15 is a bad bill and a big deficit bill. We will not and cannot support this bill.”
“Mr. Speaker, not only are the Liberals setting conditions, they are also creating health care programs. They are putting in place health programs. Unfortunately, since they have a credit card with no limit, we are now paying $55 billion a year in interest on the debt. Do my colleagues know what that $55 billion represents? It represents more than the health transfer to the provinces. The Liberals have literally ruined our ability to do more, and they keep doing it with a smile on their faces. That is unacceptable. I would like the people watching us to know that every dollar they pay in GST does not pay for services or health care; it pays down the interest on the debt, which has grown to astronomical proportions after 10 years of Liberal government.”
“Mr. Speaker, I know that the member for Winnipeg North has a lot of experience, but he kind of lives in the past. He seems to have forgotten the past 10 years, when he was led by Justin Trudeau. In 2022, under that government, the inflation rate was 6.8%. If we add up all these inflation rates, we end up today with a Canada food price report that says that people will be paying $340 a week on groceries that cost $170 barely 10 years ago. The Liberals keep saying that everything is just fine. They say that everything is fine and that it was so much worse before. Now when people pay their grocery bill, they get to the cash register and far too often they do not have enough money to cover it. All of that is because of the inaction of the Liberals over these past 10 years.”
“For Canadians who are struggling and suffering, we are here. Conservatives are here. We know that what people need is more money in their pockets to pay for their own expenses. We can do this by eliminating the taxes that are driving up the cost of food. With a Conservative government, Canadians will have more in their pockets and more in their grocery carts.”
“Michel Girard wrote the following: For the five fiscal years from 2025‑26 to 2029‑30, the accumulated deficits will reach $322 [billion dollars]....That is $168 [billion dollars] more than the five deficits that the former Trudeau government had projected for the same five fiscal years.... We have a banker Prime Minister who promised to spend less. Not only is he spending, but he is spending more than the prime minister who spent more than all the other prime ministers before him. Personally, I remember Justin Trudeau's promise that he would run small deficits: $10 billion, $10 billion, $6 billion, almost nothing, and then zero. He said that the government would get back to a balanced budget. I think we can all forget about the Liberals balancing a budget. A balanced budget means absolutely nothing to them anymore.”
“It keeps acting like everything is fine and spending lavishly, as though it found a credit card with no limit and simultaneously realized that it and the members of its cabinet will never have to pay off the balance. They will not have to pay it off; those next in line will take care of it. They are going to max out that card and pass it on with a $78-billion deficit. It is not for nothing that I want to talk about an article published in the Journal de Québec the day after the budget. Michel Girard is an economist who everyone knows and who is very credible in Quebec. The title of his article was “[The Prime Minister] does the impossible: spending more than Trudeau”. What? Well, yes, that is it. I want to emphasize the word “spending”. I would like to share a few figures on this budget.”
“Who would have thought that possible in Canada? Who would have thought that, one day, in Canada, almost everyone would be concerned about what they can afford to put in their grocery carts? Who would have thought that would be their main concern? That is unacceptable. Food inflation is double the Bank of Canada's inflation target. They say the inflation rate is going down, but food prices have doubled. That changes Canadians' lives. It changes the lives of Canadians and everyone who lives in Canada. They say that it is a global phenomenon. Why has the price of food gone up 48% faster in Canada than in the United States? The reason is the government's attitude.”
“That is the reality that the Liberals want to avoid. The Liberals claim that everything in Canada is just fine and dandy. However, when visit our riding, when we go to the grocery store, when we see the options, when we look at people's grocery baskets, we realize that something is wrong. Today, the figures prove it: People are eating less. The recently published HungerCount clearly shows us that more and more people are using food banks. Workers, people who work, who have a salary, are relying more and more on food banks to stock their refrigerators. That is the reality. This is not coming from a Conservative. This is coming from two reports, HungerCount and Canada's food price report produced by Dalhousie University. It says that 85% of Canadians reported that the cost of food was their number one financial concern.”
“At least, the wages of the people I see every day have not doubled. Minimum wage has increased a little bit—by a few percentage points, that is true—but it has not doubled. If groceries now cost $340 per week and wages have not kept pace, how can people afford the same groceries? People are not going to pay $340. They are going to have to choose. They are going to make choices. What are people going to buy? They are going to buy less meat, less meat of any kind, because all meat has gone up in price at the same time. (1700) They are going to buy fewer nutritious products, because those are the products that cost the most. How they shop for groceries will depend on their budget and how much money they have left to spend. That is not to mention that the cost of housing has doubled in the past 10 years as well.”
“The 2026 edition of Canada's Food Price Report states: “If 2025 was difficult for Canadian households, 2026 is unlikely to be any easier.” People are going to judge the Prime Minister by their experience at the grocery store. Unfortunately, more and more people can no longer even afford to go to the grocery store. The report concludes that food prices are expected to rise even more sharply. Groceries will cost $1,000 more in 2026. Let us take a look back at the damage caused by the Liberals since 2015. In 2015, it cost $8,286 to buy a year's worth of groceries. That is for a whole year. If we divide that by 52, it comes to $159 per week. Today, the cost of that same grocery list has risen to $17,500. That is $340 per week, or double what it cost in 2015. People will say that wages have increased. Wages have not doubled since 2015.”
“These food drives and events are more than just a kind gesture. They have become necessary. They have become essential. Without these events, some individuals would have nothing to get through Christmas. In May, when his cabinet members were being sworn in, the Prime Minister decided to make one issue his own personal crusade. He declared that Canadians would judge him by their experience at the grocery store. That is one way of putting it. He could have also said that Canadians would judge him on the cost of groceries. In either case, the Prime Minister decided that his priority was to make food more affordable for all Canadians. His report card came out today.”
“We are talking about the cost of living and about how people are struggling to pay their bills at the end of the month, but the Liberals are not interested in that. They are not listening to the debates. That is not surprising, because they do not want to hear the truth. They do not want to hear anything about what is really going on in the lives of the people we see every day in our ridings, at the grocery store, at the post office and so on. Today, the big media fundraising drive will help those who are struggling the most. People are collecting donations everywhere across Quebec. Despite the cold weather setting in everywhere, people will reach out to help the most vulnerable. Some people will do so tonight, while for others, it has been going on all day. It will also be happening tomorrow.”
“Madam Speaker, the holidays are just around the corner, so I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that it is always an honour for me to rise in the House on behalf of the people of Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière, whom I am very proud of, especially after a passionate speech like the one from my colleague. It is clear that members who come from a rural area are close to the community. We are close to our community, and we know just how hard times are these days. We know how tough it is for people to make ends meet at the end of the month. Unfortunately, the latest figures indicate that after 10 years under the Liberal government, more and more people simply cannot afford to pay their bills. The big media fundraising drive is happening today. The Liberals do not seem to care about what is happening in the House right now.”
“This week, my question for the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is this: Can he assure us that the government will stop playing anti-democratic political games and that committee meetings will be held as scheduled next week without last-minute cancellations? Can he also tell us what the plan is for tomorrow and next week in the House?”
“Mr. Speaker, as I was saying earlier, Canadians are very concerned about the cost of food. After 10 years under this Liberal government, people have seen the cost of food double. It now costs $340 per week compared to less than half that 10 years ago. Meanwhile, people are not paying attention to what is happening on the Hill, but they should be. Why? Because the Liberal government is causing chaos in parliamentary committees. We have to discuss bills and advance democracy, but ministers are failing to show up and committee meetings are being cancelled at the last minute. This is the government playing political games. Another such incident happened just this morning. The meeting of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights was cancelled at the last minute. On the agenda was a clause-by-clause study of a regulation.”
“Mr. Speaker, we know today that Canadians are concerned about rising food prices after 10 years of Liberal governance, but they do not see the chaos that is happening right here in the House of Commons, and in parliamentary committees in particular. Ministers are not showing up. Committees are cancelled at the last minute. We saw it again today—”
“Mr. Speaker, I spoke on this same point of order last week to ask you to allow one of our members to continue asking his question, because he had 15 seconds left in his time and he was about to get to his question on government business. I think that my Bloc Québécois colleague's argument is entirely justified. However, I find the gratuitous attack just launched by the government House leader, which is not relevant to the point of order, to be completely unwarranted. Mr. Speaker, you allowed him to issue this unwarranted attack that was completely out of context. We have the right to ask our questions. That is our right. We represent our constituents, so it is not up to the government House leader to decide what questions members of the official opposition or any other member of the House, for that matter, can ask.”
“Mr. Speaker, it seems to touch a nerve when we quote the words of their own Prime Minister . Those are not my words. It was the Prime Minister who told Canadians to judge him on the cost of groceries. The verdict is in: Groceries will cost an additional $1,000 per family next year. They will cost $17,600 a year, or $338 a week. That is double what it was 10 years ago. The Prime Minister has been judged and found lacking. Will he accept the verdict and finally put an end to his inflationary spending so that Canadians finally have enough to eat?”
“Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister , who has accomplished nothing since he took office, said something very important to Canadians when his cabinet was being sworn in. He said that Canadians could judge him by the price of groceries. Well, judgment day is here. Next year's food costs are going to rise to unprecedented levels, to use his own words. Families were spending an average of $159 a week when the Liberals took office in 2015. Ten years later, that cost has more than doubled to $340 a week. When will the Prime Minister end his inflationary spending so that Canadians can put food on the table?”
“Speaker Regan's 2018 ruling, which I respectfully submit should lead you to the conclusion that the committee acted entirely within its authority and that it therefore legitimately adopted all the common-sense, Conservative amendments.”
“This amendment would reflect the reality that the Minister of Fisheries is no longer responsible for providing Coast Guard services, because that was reassigned, effective with Order in Council PC 2025-639, dated September 2, to the Minister of National Defence. Moreover, amendment CPC-2 would simply coordinate with the change made by amendment CPC-3, which was identical to amendment G-4, to amend section 41 of the Oceans Act addressed in clause 25 of Bill C-12 to reflect the national defence minister's new responsibility for the Canadian Coast Guard. This amendment was admissible and was not subject to the deputy government House leader 's objections. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would urge you to look at the challenged amendments through the lens of Mr.”
“Next we come to amendment CPC-33, which would remove the requirement that the chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board must live in the national capital region, and which would instead simply require that he or she reside in Canada. That simple gesture alone, I would argue, could boost public confidence in the integrity of the immigration system, knowing that the appointment is not in reality limited to a government crony or a bureaucratic crony living in Ottawa. Finally, I would like to address amendment CPC-2, which would amend section 40 of the Oceans Act, an amendment which I must point out was identical to amendment G-3, standing in the name of the parliamentary secretary to the public safety minister .”