Garnett Genuis
Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta · Conservative · Canada
“It is getting increasingly harder for young people to find their first job, and for young families to afford their first home and be able to afford to take those critical steps forward in life.”
“I look forward to talking to people and listening to them over the summer. I would encourage colleagues from all parts of the country to also listen to, respect and try to understand the concerns Albertans have.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his kind words. Indeed, I would welcome him, and all members of this House from all parties, to come to Alberta this summer. Let me know. I would be happy to host. Members could spend some time talking to people in our province to understand some of their concerns.”
“This plan includes vital reforms to parental leave to make it easier for parents who are trying to start a family, maintain a connection to work and earn an income at the same time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to extend my best wishes for the summer to all colleagues from all sides. We have fought hard for our constituents, for our convictions and to advance the common good of this country.”
“We have always sought to be productive and constructive by putting forward these good ideas and asking the government to adopt them. Therefore, as we face these ongoing challenges, an affordability crisis and a youth unemployment crisis, will the government take a serious look at what we have put forward, including the Conservative youth…”
The complete record
Every one of 885 lines we hold for Garnett Genuis, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 18.
“Madam Speaker, I rise this evening to address the continuing, worsening youth unemployment crisis. The youth unemployment rate now is at 14.3%. We recently asked the finance minister about the youth unemployment crisis in this country. He would not agree in the House that we face a youth unemployment crisis, and he was not even able to state the youth unemployment rate. That is from the finance minister of this country, which shows how asleep at the switch the government is. It has no plan to address a crisis that it will not acknowledge and does not even understand the magnitude of. However, there is good news as well. This week the human resources committee tabled its detailed report on a youth unemployment crisis study, which contains many recommendations that, actually, specifically reflect the Conservative youth jobs plan.”
“Mr. Chair, I am happy to be focused on the youth unemployment issue, but he is not focused on the youth unemployment issue. He did not even know the rate of youth unemployment in this country. He has not answered a single question for me. He has not answered a single question all night. Again, I want to ask if he agrees or disagrees with the recommendation, from the all-party report from the human resources committee, that the government reduce taxes and red tape in order to address concerns about how the taxation and regulatory environment has limited productivity growth and held back youth employment. Does he agree with that recommendation, and will he act on it?”
“Mr. Chair, clearly the minister was not aware. The number is 14.3%, according to the latest StatsCan numbers. That is a very high youth unemployment rate, including against international peers. I am sorry that the minister is not willing to acknowledge tonight that we are facing a youth unemployment crisis. He should acknowledge that, and he should support the necessary actions to address it. In particular, in today's human resources committee report, there is a recommendation endorsed by all parties to reduce taxes and red tape in order to address concerns about how the taxation and regulatory environment has limited productivity growth and held back youth unemployment. Does he agree with that all-party recommendation, and will he act on it?”
“Mr. Chair, of course, we are always concerned about this issue, but these are not normal times. I wonder if the minister can confirm that he knows what the rate of youth unemployment is right now in the country and whether he thinks we are in a youth unemployment crisis.”
“Mr. Chair, that obviously had nothing to do with the question, unfortunately. I now want to ask about youth unemployment. It is a deep concern of mine and for many Canadians. I wonder if the minister agrees that we are facing a youth unemployment crisis in the country.”
“Mr. Chair, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board has operating expenses of over $1.7 billion. It has an average of over half a million dollars in compensation per employee. I wonder if the minister expects the so-called Canadian sovereign wealth fund to have similar operating costs and expenses.”
“These wise young people from Newmarket—Aurora are proposing Canadian jobs and Canadian training for Canadian students. We want Canadian young people to be able to fill the gaps that exist in our labour market, so that we have opportunities for the next generation. Again, I want to commend these young people from Newmarket—Aurora for their hard work on this excellent petition.”
“Therefore, petitioners call on the Government of Canada to prioritize public policy and funding that protect and expand access to education and work for Canadian youth, especially low- and middle-income students, before committing equivalent public resources to large international scholarship initiatives; to tie accepted applications to current and projected gaps within the workforce; and to create pathways for those who have completed their education within Canada to help fill current gaps within the Canadian labour market, and require that these international scholarships include a clear funding breakdown and a public assessment of likely effects on domestic students and labour markets, and measures to ensure that Canadian students benefit.”
“Petitioners highlight that young Canadians are struggling to find jobs, afford housing and pay for education, yet the current Liberal government continues to prioritize international programs and foreign partnerships over the needs of young Canadians. Petitioners argue that the federal government has committed large amounts of money to foreign scholarships. While the federal government needs to continue to increase applicants' acceptance to current projected gaps in the labour market, it should be prioritizing the needs of domestic students first. The petitioners note that the federal government continues to expand these international initiatives. Meanwhile, Canadian students continue to struggle in various ways to afford education and access employment opportunities that they need.”
“Mr. Speaker, finally, before we recessed, there was a very large group of young people from Newmarket—Aurora . My colleague from Newmarket—Aurora has convened a very large and active youth council that has been organizing its own petitions, responding to concerns that exist in that community. I want to commend my colleague from Newmarket—Aurora for her incredible work with young people in her community and also the young people who worked hard to organize this petition, relating specifically to some issues of employment that I think are very important, relating to the desire of young people to have access to jobs, homes and hope.”
“Petitioners hope that all members will get behind Bill C-260 and protect the ability of veterans, people with disabilities, the elderly, those living in poverty and all Canadians to be able to access public services without fear of this kind of coercion. They also want to see the government take additional steps to combat the problem of this coercion.”
“(1550) Petitioners call attention to the testimony of the CEO of Inclusion Canada, Krista Carr, before the finance committee, that she hears weekly complaints from people with disabilities who have had facilitated death proposed to them when they are trying to access other public services. They highlight the story of Christine Gauthier, a veteran living with disability who was fighting simply to get a wheelchair stairlift from Veterans Affairs Canada. A caseworker suggested she pursue facilitated death instead. These are not isolated cases. There are many examples of this on our website, carenotcoercion.ca. Bill C-260 would provide a response to this by prohibiting bureaucrats from proposing facilitated death to those who have not asked for information about it.”
“Mr. Speaker, next I would like to present a petition in support of my private member's bill, Bill C-260 , the care not coercion act. Incidentally, more information about that is available at our custom website, carenotcoercion.ca. Canadians are concerned about the many reports, including those laid out on our website, indicating a series of problems of veterans, people with disabilities, seniors and those living in poverty being offered MAID or euthanasia by bureaucrats when they are trying to access unrelated public services. These repeated, unprompted offers from those who are not even supposed to be involved in providing facilitated death can be coercive in nature and make it more difficult for people to access public services they are entitled to.”
“Petitioners call on the Government of Canada to reverse the proposed changes, to ensure equal and fair access to student financial assistance for all students regardless of institution type and to support training pathways that align with labour market needs, including skilled trades and other high-demand professions.”
“This creates unequal treatment among students based on the type of institution they attend rather than the value or demand of their chosen field of study. For many in-demand careers, including in the skilled trades and in health care fields including, for instance, traditional Chinese medicine, the training is offered through regulated career colleges. Removing grant eligibility risks reducing access to affordable training for students, particularly those from low and middle-income backgrounds, and limiting support for these programs may worsen existing labour shortages in critical sectors of the Canadian economy.”
“Mr. Speaker, the next petition I am presenting highlights the concerns of Canadians about the government's attack on vocational institutions. Budget 2025 proposed restricting eligibility for the Canada student grant for full-time students to those attending public or not-for-profit institutions, excluding many students at regulated career colleges. These are reputable institutions that provide important vocational training, providing skills to young people that align with the needs of the labour market, and yet the government is changing the situation such that any program at a university entitles one to make an application for student grants if they meet the financial need criteria, whereas no students would be eligible if they are at vocational institutions, outside of narrowly prescribed exceptions.”
“They reflect the reality of the modern workforce, allowing people to continue to grow and develop their skills while being plugged into work at the same time as taking more time to be present and engaged with the lives of their children. I commend that petition to the consideration of the House, and I certainly look forward to hearing what the government has to say in response to it.”
“Petitioners call on the Government of Canada to implement the Conservative proposals for a better parental leave system, to establish more flexible parental leave policies, allowing parental leave benefits to be paused and resumed within the existing maximum parental leave time frame of 18 months by mutual agreement between employer and employee, to ensure that parents can pursue education or skills training while on parental leave without losing access to benefits and to create a caregiving exception to EI parental leave benefit clawbacks so that parents may provide limited paid caregiving without penalty. These changes are good for families, and they are good for the economy.”
“The current parental leave system, outside of Quebec, does not generally allow parents to pause and later resume parental leave, even where a temporary return to work would better suit the needs of the family and the employer. Petitioners also point out that parents should be able to pursue education or skills training while on parental leave without loss of benefits, and that parents who provide occasional paid caregiving services to other families while caring for their own children should not face benefit clawbacks that discourage flexible work and the expansion of child care options.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a real pleasure for me to be able to present a petition in support of the parental leave reforms announced by the Conservative Party. These are very popular reforms with petitioners and others. People want to see more flexible parental leave that allows people to make their own choices when it comes to integrating their work with time spent with family and children. Petitioners draw the attention of the House to the fact that Canada's existing parental leave system is far too rigid. It should support families, instead of forcing them into rigid choices that do not reflect the realities of modern parenting. Petitioners want to see more flexibility to allow a balance between work, caregiving and skills development during the early years of a child's life.”
“Mr. Speaker, Conservatives have been putting forward very specific, constructive solutions from the very beginning. The Liberal plan is not working. The member spoke about skilled trades. The reality is that, in the last month, we lost 15,700 jobs in construction alone and thousands of jobs in natural resources, utilities and manufacturing. We need skilled trades workers, and we need jobs for those skilled trades workers to work in. Why is the government killing opportunity for skilled trades workers and others with its continuing failures on the economy?”
“Mr. Speaker, today's unemployment numbers bring more troubling news. It is more job losses, more pain and more of the same, with 112,000 job losses so far this year. Unemployment is up. Youth unemployment is surging. Student unemployment is at a whopping 16%. Conservatives are putting forward constructive solutions. Liberals are ignoring them. Are these job numbers finally enough to wake up the Prime Minister ?”
“If someone studies at a university, they can get a student grant, but if they study at a vocational institution, preparing them for a specific vocational career where there are shortages, the government has cut that out. What we suggest is that the government not discriminate against students at vocational institutions. Would the Liberals at least listen to that constructive idea?”
“Mr. Speaker, that was not really an answer to what I asked. Here are the facts. We have a metastasizing youth unemployment crisis in this country. There are various factors and many factors of government policy that are contributing to it. We have put forward constructive solutions in the area of supporting families that I talked about today, reforming parental leave, and also in the area of addressing youth unemployment. We have been very constructive and clear with the government. The Liberals say they are willing to listen, but they do not really listen or respond to these constructive proposals we put forward. The member spoke about changes that the government has made in training. Here is what the government did in the last budget. It rendered ineligible vocational institutions to receive student grants.”
“Removing the clawbacks associated with earning in this situation would increase the availability of child care, which, in many cases, notwithstanding the exaggerated promises of the government, simply is not available to many parents. We are working hard to propose constructive solutions to the very real and practical challenges facing youth and young families today. I would like to know why the government has not taken the opportunity to embrace these solutions. I think it would be a political win for them and it would be a win for youth and families. Will the government take on these good ideas that we have proposed?”
“These policy proposals involve flexible parental leave, allowing a person on parental leave to pause and resume that leave. We proposed learning on leave, allowing anyone to take courses of study while they are on parental leave so that they can upgrade their skills and strengthen their ability to meet the labour market again once their leave is over. We also proposed a caregiving exception to EI parental leave benefit clawbacks. This would allow somebody who is caring for their own children to also do paid caregiving work on the side. Perhaps while they are watching their own child, their neighbour pays them to watch their child as well.”
“We have developed and offered the government concrete solutions to these problems. Obviously, the government is the government. It has the power to implement these things and we do not, but we have put constructive solutions on the table and asked the government to implement all or part of what we put forward. This fall, we put forward the Conservative youth jobs plan, a clear plan addressing the youth unemployment crisis, with proposals to unleash the economy, fix immigration, fix training and build homes where the jobs are. Just today, we announced another suite of policy initiatives, this time targeting the challenges that young families are facing. We are proposing substantial parental leave reform that would make life easier for those who are trying to start a family.”
“I think that has a lot to do with challenges in employment and challenges in housing affordability, these basic challenges in getting started in life here in Canada because of how difficult those start-up costs are. The youth unemployment crisis is a big part of it. It is very clear that what the government is doing or says it is doing in this regard is just not working. Listening to question period today, I heard that the government wants to celebrate, allegedly, this initiative or that initiative, but the overall numbers paint a clear picture, which is a metastasizing, unprecedented youth unemployment crisis that is connected to and contributes to challenges that families are facing as well. Conservatives have taken a very constructive approach to the employment file.”
“Mr. Speaker, tonight I am following up on a question that I asked about the crisis in youth unemployment. Life is very challenging right now in this country, especially for youth and for young families. People who are struggling to get their start in life struggle to access employment. They struggle with housing affordability. This makes it difficult and leads to delays in family formation. We know, statistically, that if we ask women how many children they want to have and compare that to our current fertility rate, there is a gap of almost one child per woman. Many Canadian families are not having as many children as they would like to have.”
“Mr. Speaker, the government has $1 trillion dollars in credit card debt, and the Liberals keep telling us that everything is fine. Everything is not fine. In the midst of this environment, Conservatives are offering constructive proposals to support youth and young families that are struggling. In the fall, we announced the Conservative youth jobs plan. Just today, we announced big, new ideas to reform parental leave to make it easier to start and grow a family. Instead of doubling down on more of the same failure, will the Liberals must listen to and support the big ideas that we are putting forward to help young people and families finally succeed?”
“Mr. Speaker, objectively, the Liberals' so-called plan is simply not working. Conditions are extremely difficult in this country for youth and for young families. The Liberals' trillion dollars of debt means less growth and fewer jobs, especially for people just starting out. Credit card budgeting, high taxes and poor immigration policy have all contributed. We see more costs, more taxes, more debt and more on the national credit card, more of the same. The Prime Minister is just another costly Liberal with no results to show for this waste. When will Liberals reverse policies that are objectively not working, so young people can get back to work?”
“Mr. Speaker, this certainly is the sort of issue where we would hope for cross-party collaboration and hope to not have a spirit of partisanship. From what I understand, that spirit of collaboration was what prevailed at committee. It prevailed in a context where co-operation was required, because of the minority conditions that Canadians voted for. If a party win a majority at the polls, fair enough. It has a mandate from Canadians to proceed as a majority. However, if Canadians vote for a minority that necessitates co-operation, and then a party tries to throw that out the window, and then acts in this ultra partisan fashion while we are trying to advance solutions for victims, that is inappropriate.”
“Mr. Speaker, I agree with my Bloc Québécois colleague. I also thank him for the work that was done by the opposition parties. He mentioned the Liberal Party's hypocrisy. The Liberals talk a lot about co-operation, yet they tried to eliminate the need for it. Right after that, they decided to change this bill completely. This truly is an example of Liberal hypocrisy.”
“Mr. Speaker, that was a question that went madly off in all directions. This is a bill about protecting victims of sexual violence. We can have a conversation about military spending, capabilities and all of these other issues, but, fundamentally, here is the point. The committee heard directly during its deliberations from victims and from experts. For those who know this process best, a majority of that committee, representative of the House of Commons that Canadians elected, chose amendments to strengthen the bill and respond to the testimony they heard. Then Liberals used an undemocratic, stolen majority to try to undo all that work.”
“In this context, with this undemocratic majority, we will continue to use all of the tools we have to hold the government accountable and fight for what is right. Government members and ministers need to hear demands from their constituents that the government reverse course and stand with victims of sexual violence. I think the member for Nunavut needs to hear from her constituents on this, asking her to stand with the work that she previously did on committee. I think we need to see a response from the public that holds the government accountable for what it is doing, right away, with this undemocratic majority.”
“That is not how it should happen. That is not what Canadians voted for in the last election, but it seems that it is what they want, and their first test case for this is undermining protections for victims of sexual violence. It is shameful, what is happening. It is undemocratic and wrong, and it will have serious negative implications for survivors who are seeking justice in the future. I want to commend the members of the committee who worked hard on this. I want to commend our shadow minister for defence as well as members of other parties who worked collaboratively on this process but who, sadly, saw all of that work undone when the government decided to move these motions, rejecting these amendments.”
“Whether a person just changes all of their opinions at once, or whether some members of the government intend on standing up against the efforts of the minister and the front bench to dismantle this legislation, at the end of the day, every member controls how they vote when the time comes. They will have a chance to vote specifically on the decisions of the minister and the government to undo the work that was done. This is the real, concrete outworking of the Liberals' seizure of an undemocratic majority. It now gives them, in practice, the ability to ignore what witnesses say, to ignore collaboration and to ignore the work that can be done across parties to analyze an issue from different angles and get to a result, and the Prime Minister can act as a kind of executive and direct all of the affairs that happen in this place.”
“I have to wonder what the member for Nunavut is thinking in all this. Individual members, whatever caucus they sit in, are still personally accountable before their voters, and before whatever other institutions they see themselves as accountable in front of, for the decisions they make in the House and the votes they cast here. When a member sits as part of the NDP and works collaboratively on amendments to strengthen legislation to protect victims of sexual violence, and then that member joins a caucus that is systematically undoing and ignoring the work that was done, it is hard for me to understand the dissonance.”
“Speaker, the member opposite from, I believe, Ajax is heckling me to say, “Majority prevails.” Ryan Turnbull: Whitby. Garnett Genuis: Whitby. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry. I do want to make sure that he is held accountable for heckling during a speech about protecting victims of sexual violence. The member for Whitby says the majority rules. Well, this is a majority that Canadians did not vote for and that, in the first instance, the Liberals are using to undo collaborative committee work on protecting victims of sexual violence. They want a majority, they say, to move at speeds unseen in generations. They are moving at speeds unseen in generations to dismantle collaborative committee work to protect victims of sexual violence. At the first opportunity they have, that is what they are using their majority to do.”
“The government has systematically, regardless of world view, lured and then neutered members of the opposition to join and give the Liberals a majority government, which Canadians did not vote for. Now, they are using that undemocratic majority to undo the work that was done at committee. They have moved motions in the House to undo the work that was done painstakingly at committee: listening to survivors, strengthening the legislation. That work has all been ignored and undone through a motion proposed by the government. The Liberals now believe that they can rely on all the members of their newly formed, undemocratic majority to undermine the collaborative work that was done on this issue at committee. (1820) Ryan Turnbull: Majority prevails. Garnett Genuis: Mr.”
“At the time, the member for Nunavut was with the NDP caucus and was her party's defence critic, working with other parties on this legislation. That was the cross-party work that happened, and really that has to happen in a minority Parliament. In a minority Parliament, one party cannot dictate the outcome of legislation, which requires negotiation, listening to witnesses and listening to each other. In the context of a minority Parliament, this legislation was an example of that collaboration at its best, of members of Parliament rising to the occasion, working through the difficult issues, listening and coming to conclusions. However, what do we have now?”
“From what I understand, and I am not a member of that committee, work happened at committee on the bill, bringing together people from different party backgrounds to try to incorporate all the feedback that was received from survivors to make this legislation effective. It is not, and should not be, a partisan issue, which is why Conservatives, New Democrats and members of the Bloc listened to the testimony, came together and put forward amendments to the bill that reflected that testimony, strengthened that framework and established, through those amendments, a framework that would have really worked and gone as far as possible to protect these victims and survivors. From what I understand, even government members on the committee supported some of those amendments that the opposition worked on together.”
“We have before us today Bill C-11 , which would make changes to the military justice system in this country. Fundamentally, what we are seeing in debate at this stage of the bill is the tragic implications of the Liberals seizing an undemocratic majority, and what they are doing with that majority to undermine the important collaborative cross-party work that was done on legislation in this chamber prior to the seizure of that undemocratic majority. This is a bill about a sombre, serious subject: protecting victims, or trying to protect victims, of sexual violence. It is an issue on which parties should be able to work together.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to begin my speech today by sharing with members that before coming to the House a few minutes ago, I was at a screening on the Hill of the documentary film Traces , which is about the issue of conflict-related sexual violence in Ukraine. It is a great honour to have with us, on the Hill, the director of that film, who shared directly with us about her own experience of being a victim of conflict-related sexual violence and the work she has done on this film. It is important for the House to know and to reflect on the fact that, as part of the ongoing illegal, genocidal invasion of Ukraine, we are seeing the systematic use of sexual violence as a tool by the invaders for terror. It should underline our knowledge of the horrific nature of this invasion and the need for ongoing Canadian support for the Ukrainian people.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to be transparent with the member that a lot of the feedback I have received from Canadians living with disabilities and organizations that represent them is that they want us to go much further. They would rather the bill did not have the exemptions it does and would like it to go much further. I am very sympathetic to that. I would like it to go much further as well, but I think we hear from the questions that we are still at a level where people in this House are struggling to listen to those with disabilities and even understand and appreciate that this is a problem at all. Therefore, I would encourage members to open their ears, to talk to people with disabilities in their communities and to understand the problems they are facing in this regard.”
“However, I think most Canadians would say that it is common sense that if one calls Veterans Affairs Canada asking for help getting a stairlift, and the person on the other end of the line who is in a position of authority says they cannot get that stairlift for them, but asks if they have ever thought about dying instead, that is inappropriate. That should not be happening. The fact that it happens a lot means it should be stopped.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will explain again what the bill does. Those in positions of authority who are not doctors and nurses, that is, who are not supposed to be involved in the provision of MAID at all, are not to bring up MAID to a person who has not asked for information about it. If one is calling Veterans Affairs Canada, visiting their parole officer, consulting with a professor or meeting with a social worker and seeking help for unrelated services, and out of the blue that service provider tells that person that they should pursue MAID, this bill says that is inappropriate. If the members of the Bloc do not agree with it, they are welcome to vote however they like on this bill.”
“He is wrong, but let us suppose that he is right, let us say this happens very rarely, my bill says it should not happen at all. Therefore, even if he thinks this does not happen very often, then he should still support the bill, because it prevents this from happening in the cases where it does.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am very surprised to hear the parliamentary secretary for veterans affairs speak in this way given the preponderance of testimony we have heard on this subject. He should know that the veterans affairs committee has heard from many veterans who have raised this concern. They have highlighted friends of theirs who have had the same issues who are afraid to speak out, for understandable reasons. We have had many instances involving multiple different caseworkers in different provinces where these concerns have been brought forward. I mentioned testimony from Inclusion Canada that weekly hears complaints from people living with disabilities who bring these issues forward. I would say this as well to the parliamentary secretary.”
“This is where high principle meets the world of practical politics until, perhaps, the configuration of Parliament allows us to do more. For my part, I will always defend the immutable dignity of the human person: the simple idea that human rights are for humans, including the elderly, the sick, those with mental health challenges, those with disabilities, the very old and the very young. This is something that a truly just society must ultimately recognize.”