Abdelhaq Sari

Mr. Speaker, before I ask my question, I would like to explain something very important to my colleague. Bill C-5 opened the door or laid the foundation, but Bill C-39 is what puts the framework in place to help our projects move forward. That is something I wanted to clarify. I see that the members opposite want us to move on projects more quickly, to build faster and stronger. We all agree on that. My question is very simple. Can we count on them to move things along more quickly in committee too?

Mr. Speaker, on July 22, Montreal North, Montreal, Quebec and Canada lost a leading light of the musical and arts communities when Canadian jazz legend Oliver Jones passed away at the age of 91. As a friend of Oscar Peterson and an officer of the Order of Canada, he brought Montreal jazz to the world's biggest stages without ever losing his deep sense of humility. To us, Oliver Jones was first and foremost a neighbour and a friend. He lived in Montreal North for many years. Our performance hall is named after him. To honour the borough's 100th anniversary, he created a new arrangement of music written by students from the borough of Montreal North. That was the kind of person he was: a prominent artist who never forgot where he came from and never stopped giving back to his community. On behalf of his neighbours and all Canadians, I offer my deepest condolences to his family. I am sure that everyone will agree when I say that Oliver Jones' music will live on. It truly is part of us.

Madam Speaker, I would simply like to emphasize once again that, just like other bills, this one will be referred to committee. We know that many of her colleagues across the way are very supportive of the idea that it will take a year to review projects and decide whether they can go ahead. Will we be able to count on their work to improve the bill when it is studied in committee?

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with the member for Eglinton—Lawrence. Sometimes a country has to choose between watching history unfold or making history itself. Canada is at a point right now where we have to choose to be the master of our own destiny. All around us, the world is changing and shifting gears. Technology is completely transforming industries. Supply chains are being redrawn and geopolitical uncertainty weighs on every investment decision. Meanwhile, capital waits for no one. It goes where people know how to build. It goes where the rules are clear and decisions are actually made. Bill C-39 asks a simple question: Will Canada be that country? We have everything we need to succeed. We have an abundance of natural resources, one of the most skilled workforces in the world, enterprising companies and strong institutions that inspire confidence well beyond our borders. However, nothing is built on potential alone. It is like a mighty river without a power plant. Its immense power does not produce light until we learn how to harness it. A resource creates value only if we can develop it responsibly. Technology will transform the economy only if we can build the necessary infrastructure to properly support that technology. A product creates wealth only once it reaches the customer. This country was not built by waiting. It was built by people who laid rail across impossible distances, who opened ports or rugged coastal lines, who believed that connecting a nation was worth the effort. They did not have certainty. They had conviction. Today, our nation-building projects look different because we have critical minerals, clean energy, advanced manufacturing, modern port transmission lines and digital networks. The question is this: Do we still have the resolve to build? The question we must ask ourselves is the one our ancestors also asked. Do we still have the determination to build? Across the country, we are hearing the same message from workers, communities, indigenous partners and investors. Our federal approval processes are too long and too complex. The requirements—

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for that comment. I certainly do not want to jeopardize the health of our interpreters, who do an excellent job. As I said earlier, our federal approval processes are too long and too complex. Requirements pile up, reviews overlap and the process drags on for years. Imagine a family wanting to renovate their home and being instructed to submit the same file to five different offices without ever being told when they can expect a decision. Eventually, they will give up. That is exactly what is happening with investments. When investors have to wait forever, capital goes elsewhere, taking jobs with it. That is why the government must modernize federal project review processes. Our goal is clear: to make federal decisions on major projects within one year while maintaining rigorous environmental standards and respecting the rights of indigenous peoples. To be clear, this is not about lowering the bar. It is about making sure projects do not get lost in a maze. Efficiency need not come at the expense of rigour. A predictable timeline does not determine the decision. It simply guarantees that there will be one, be it positive or negative. Collaboration with indigenous peoples lies at the heart of this approach. Indigenous communities must be part and parcel of the decisions affecting their lands, their rights and their social and economic future. A clearer process does not diminish their participation; it makes it more meaningful, more consistent and, above all, more frequent. We reject the idea that we must choose between economic development, environmental protection and reconciliation. A mature country knows how to make progress on all three fronts while also remaining aligned with all three at the same time. Canada is a trading nation. Our prosperity travels by rail, road, sea and air. Our ports, highways and railways are the arteries of our economy, and every bottleneck acts as an invisible tax—a tax that stifles investment before it even begins, before it is even triggered. It is paid by the farmer waiting for their grain to be shipped, by the manufacturer whose parts are not arriving and, at the end of the chain, by the family seeing prices rise at the supermarket. The bill modernizes the governance of the transportation sectors, strengthens our commercial infrastructure and consolidates our supply chains. It also takes account of a new reality. In a more unstable world, the security and resilience of our networks are no longer a luxury. They are a prerequisite for our growth. Behind every port, every rail line and every construction site, there are people. More than a million Canadians work in federally regulated sectors, keeping goods moving and communities connected. In most cases, employers and unions reach agreements at their negotiating table, and that speaks to the strength of our system. This bill builds on that strength. The bill tackles wage theft and the misclassification of workers. It improves workplace safety and supports stable and respectful labour relations. That is because an economy that forgets its workers is neither modern nor fair. I meet people every day in my riding of Bourassa, in Montreal, who are not asking for any special privileges. They are not asking for anything special because all they want is a chance: a stable job, a fair wage and a safe workplace. When we talk about major projects, trade corridors and competitiveness, these are the folks we are talking about. Growth only makes sense if it improves their lives. This bill is the result of extensive consultations with indigenous peoples, the provinces and territories, businesses, unions and members of the public. While their points of view sometimes differed, there was one common message, namely that Canadians want a more efficient government, environmentally responsible growth, robust infrastructure and good jobs. They want an ambitious Canada that remains true to its values. In closing, investment decisions are being made now. Major projects are being planned now. Tomorrow's trade partnerships are being developed today. From northern communities to the Atlantic provinces, from the Prairies to British Columbia, from Ontario to Quebec, Canadians are ready to build. It is up to us to give them a country that is ready too. Let us move forward with confidence, build responsibly and leave future generations with a stronger, fairer Canada that is more ready than ever.

Madam Speaker, today, as things stand, I think that this matter needs to be discussed by parliamentarians in committee. I urge all my colleagues, all MPs, to share their opinions and comments and put forward amendments. Some consultations have been held, and there will be more, but we can talk about that in committee.

Madam Speaker, first of all, members need to listen carefully to the speeches given by each of my colleagues on our side of the House. What we are saying is that we want to deliver an answer within a year, whether positive or negative. That is very important. This is no blanket approval process. We are not interested in giving out carte blanche. On the contrary, there will be some negotiation. That is very important. Now, to speed things up, we simply need to make decisions in committee faster. If people here really want to move faster, the Conservatives will have to co-operate with us so we can make decisions in committee. Once again, Bill C-5, Bill C-39's predecessor, laid a strong foundation. Now, we are setting the stage for all future projects.

Madam Speaker, as I understand it, the question was about strikes and unions. I would say that what we are now bringing back in this bill is the complete opposite. Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code has been used to end strikes in recent years. Its use will be clarified. I would say it will be much better monitored by the department. Today, things are vague. Tomorrow, things will be much less vague. In fact, a number of unions are starting to warm up to this amendment to section 107.

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. Building Canada strong means seizing opportunities. For that reason, the changes in this bill are very important. That said, no one should be left behind. That is why it is very important to consult all stakeholders as well as Canadians who are having a tough time every day. Naturally, the stakeholders include indigenous peoples.

Mr. Speaker, before I begin my speech, allow me to welcome everyone back to the House. It is a privilege for me to serve in this place and represent the people of my riding, Bourassa. As I said earlier, it is an honour for me to rise on behalf of the people of Bourassa to speak to Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act. I want to describe a scene that we see every morning. Before work, a mother stops at a gas station, looks up at the posted gas price, does a quick mental calculation and decides to spend $20. She does not spend a penny more because the rest of the money has to go toward feeding her children that week. No one sees it or hears about it, but this is something that happens thousands of times a day across the country. I see this scene playing out in my riding, whether it be with a personal support worker who leaves work at dawn after their night shift, a delivery person who crisscrosses the city from morning until night, a taxi driver who is calculating how many litres they will need that day or a small business owner whose pickup truck is their livelihood. For them, the price of gas is not an economic indicator, a statistic or a quantitative indicator. It is much more than that. It is a concern that they have from the time they get into their car every morning until the end of the day. We are living in a time of global instability. Supply disruptions in the Middle East are sending shockwaves to energy markets around the world, and it is our families who are paying the price at the pump. We cannot put an end to global conflicts, but we can choose not to let Canadians deal with the consequences of those conflicts alone. That is the choice that our government is making today. Bill C-38, introduced by the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, temporarily extends the federal fuel excise tax until January 31, 2027. Then from Februrary 1 to March 31, 2027, a half-rate will apply. This tax is 10¢ per litre of gasoline and 4¢ per litre of diesel. Suspending it will save up to about $5.75 on a 50-litre fill-up of regular gasoline and up to $2.30 on a fill-up of diesel. Some members across the way might say that is not much. However, we must consider what a few extra dollars each week mean to a mother, a delivery driver who fills up three times or more a week, or a small business that relies on several vehicles for its livelihood. For these people, it is not a small amount. It is a breath of fresh air. For someone who is out of breath, a bit of breathing room makes all the difference. The gradual return to the mid-range rate also offers something valuable: predictability. Families and businesses deserve to be able to plan ahead rather than face a sudden shock overnight. I am focusing on diesel because, when diesel is cheaper, it means the trucks that deliver food, fruits and vegetables cost less to operate. It means construction sites make progress faster. It means the agricultural sector can breathe a sigh of relief. Whether we are talking about trucking, food, agriculture, housing, construction, or delivery, this measure affects what we eat, where we live, and what we receive day after day. It is one of many steps we are taking. This is not the only step the government has taken to help Canadians. Bill C-38 does not stand alone, because affordability is not something can simply be declared; it must be built, one step at a time. Since July 1, 2025, nearly 22 million Canadians have been paying less tax thanks to the reduction of the first marginal rate from 15% to 14%. That means up to $420 per person, and up to $840 for a two-income family. We have eliminated the GST for first-time homebuyers purchasing a newly built home valued at up to $1 million and reduced it for new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million, because the dream of home ownership should not disappear within a single generation. We created the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. In the spring, a one-time top-up of $3.1 billion was paid to 12 million Canadians. Since July 2026, the benefit has been increased by 25% for five years and is paid quarterly so that the benefit arrives when the bills do. A family of four will receive up to $1,890 this year. It will receive $1,890 this year. I am repeating that because it is very important for the Canadians listening to us today. We want them to see this as some breathing room that can help them manage under the current circumstances. A single person, meanwhile, may receive up to $950. Upon taking office, the Prime Minister eliminated consumer carbon pricing in the provinces and territories where it applied, lowering the cost of gas by about 18¢ a litre in those regions and helping to curb inflation. We have made the national school food program permanent, feeding nearly 400,000 children every year and saving a family with two children about $800 a year. Children with full bellies in the morning are freed up to learn, stay in school and have the peace of mind they need to get the most out of their school day. There is no better investment for the country's future than to invest in our young people and children, especially when it comes to helping them go to school with full bellies. With automatic benefit payments, up to 5.5 million low-income Canadians will finally receive what they are entitled to. In a neighbourhood like mine, Bourassa, so many families are losing out on their rights because of a lack of information or missing paperwork. This is not an administrative measure; it is a matter of dignity. Finally, we are strengthening competition in telecommunications and financial services so that Canadians can switch providers more easily. In conclusion, our vision is clear: We are building a stronger economy, diversifying our trade partnerships around the world, capitalizing on our strengths and creating better jobs and higher wages. However, building for tomorrow must never make us forget the challenges we face today. No one should be left behind. It is very important to include all Canadians in our strategy and to truly keep them in mind at all times when we develop measures like the one before us today. Let us come back to the mother gassing up at the pump. Thanks to Bill C-38, maybe she will no longer have to stop at $20. Maybe she can fill the tank. Maybe she can keep a few dollars for a pair of winter boots for her children or for a family outing she has been putting off for months. This bill will not fix everything. We know that. No one here is saying that. However, it is telling millions of Canadians something essential: We see them, we hear them and we are here for them. Relief only works if it is timely, so I invite all my colleagues from all parties to quickly support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for keeping track of how long I have been here; I learn something new every day. I will circle back to my colleague's question before I wrap up. What I have learned over the past year and a half is that our government has introduced quite a few measures to help families and young people. These are targeted, temporary, one-off measures. They are designed to address the concerns that citizens have raised with us. There is a question I would like to put to my colleague on the other side. We have been implementing measures to help families for a year and a half. However, as the new MP for Bourassa, I was very surprised to see MPs on the other side of the House voting against them. That said, I would like to thank the member once again for his work.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his question. It gives me another opportunity today to reiterate a number of measures introduced by our government. As I said earlier, a family of four can receive up to $1,890, and a single person, up to $950. This assistance is geared to families. As I mentioned earlier, something I hold very dear deserves reiterating. I am referring to the roughly 400,000 children a year who truly benefit from Canada's national school food program. This is the kind of practical action I am talking about. There are others, but time prevents me from listing them all. What bothers me the most, however, is seeing people on the other side of the House vote against family-oriented measures aimed at helping Canadians. That disappoints me a lot.

Mr. Speaker, this gives me an opportunity to go back to the scenario I described at the beginning of my speech. Imagine a woman in my riding who is a personal support worker and who has just finished her shift at dawn. This woman decides to only pump 20 dollars' worth of gas because she cannot afford to fill up her tank. Alternatively, imagine someone who makes a lot of deliveries and whose vehicle is their livelihood. There are people like that in my riding and in my colleague's riding. We are trying to fix these issues so we can help these people day after day with concrete measures.

Mr. Speaker, people are coming out of the woodwork every day claiming to be AI experts. Some have contacted me, others have tried to meet with me and, recently, someone insisted that I read his book. I thought to myself, “Oh no, not another one!” I decided to take his advice anyway and read his book. Well, I followed his advice. The book showcases the extraordinary work of local entrepreneur Patrick Chenel, co-founder of ConqrAI and an AI strategy specialist with over 30 years of experience working with Quebec's biggest companies. In his book AI‑Driven Enterprise, he proposes a concrete framework that focuses on three key dimensions: knowledge management, knowledge sovereignty and human-centred AI governance. At a time when Canada is adopting an AI strategy, that kind of thinking needs to be highlighted. It reminds us that AI must also be human-centred. I call on the House to recognize Mr. Chenel's contribution to the public debate on AI and to encourage dialogue among the political, business and innovation communities.

Mr. Speaker, when someone's refrigerator breaks down, they call a technician. If he says that the part is no longer available, that the documentation is missing or was never available, or that the cost of the repair exceeds the price of a new appliance, that person is forced to spend $500, $1,000, or even more, to replace something that could have been, and should have been, repaired. This is not bad luck. It is a business model. It is called “planned obsolescence”. Devices are deliberately designed not to last, not to be repairable and to force replacement. This model costs Canadian families dearly every year.

Mr. Speaker, I am speaking today about Bill C-267. Someone's refrigerator breaks down. They call a technician, who says that the part is no longer available, that the repair manual is missing or was never available and that the cost of the repair exceeds the price of a new appliance. That person is then forced to spend $500, $1,000, or even more, to replace something that should have been repaired. This is not bad luck. It is a business model. It is called planned obsolescence. These appliances are deliberately designed not to last and not to be repairable in order to force people to repair them. This model costs Canadian families dearly every year. The solution is a collaborative national framework. That is what Bill C-267 proposes: a response that is both simple and ambitious—a national framework for sustainable and repairable electronic products and essential devices. It is not a rigid regulation; it is not an encroachment on provincial jurisdictions. It is a flexible framework developed in collaboration with the regions, the provinces, industry and consumer advocacy groups that would finally give Canadians the right to know, the right to choose and the right to repair. In practical terms, the bill sets minimal durability standards and requires the availability of spare parts, technical documentation for independent repair persons, and clear labelling so that consumers know what they are sinking their money into before they spend it. Through this bill, Canada is simply catching up with the rest of the world. The European Union introduced a right to repair directive in 2024. The United Kingdom passed its legislation back in 2021. In the U.S., over twenty states have taken action with bipartisan support. Apple, Samsung, LG and Whirlpool are already adapting these standards to their other markets. This means a minimal burden for Canada. The benefit for families will be substantial, tangible and real. We may wonder who is going to benefit. First, Canadian families that cannot afford to replace everything once a year will benefit; the repair shops that my colleagues mentioned earlier will benefit; local SMEs, often run by tradespeople and immigrants who are currently denied access by manufacturers to the parts and information they need to perform repairs will benefit. Most of all, the environment and our planet will benefit, because each appliance repaired rather than discarded represents a resource conserved and one less piece of trash. Repair is an integral part of Quebec and Canadian culture. I know several associations and groups in Bourassa, Montreal and elsewhere in Quebec that help people with their repair projects. Today I would like to talk about the community of activists and volunteers who help people with repairs. One example is Wai Chu Cheng in the riding of Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park: She is the co-founder of Repair Café in Toronto, Ontario. This culture is not confined to Quebec or Alberta; it is across Canada. In closing, I am reaching out to my colleagues from all parties, all regions and from every province. This is not a partisan bill. It is a sensible bill. It makes a lot of sense because it provides that things can be repaired instead of merely replaced, that we can be informed instead of being unaware, and that we can work together instead of imposing anything. I think of the families in Bourassa and across the country who are watching what we do here today. The bill is not a partisan project. It is a promise to every household that deserves better: to repair, not replace, to inform, not ignore, and to collaborate, not oppose. That is what I believe, and that is what I ask the House to stand for. Let us refer this bill to committee, where we can improve it together, hear from witnesses and strengthen it. That is what Canadian families deserve, and that is what this bill delivers.

Mr. Speaker, I sincerely thank my colleague for her eloquence and for the way she presented this bill and its various provisions. I would like to highlight a very important aspect of this bill, and that is the support it provides to municipalities and police forces. I would like to ask my colleague if she could elaborate on the issue of victims' rights, expand on her thoughts on that and, obviously, tell us how this bill will provide more protection for survivors of violence.

Madam Speaker, AI is fundamentally redefining how Canadians work, learn and build their businesses. Our students want the skills and tools to seize the jobs of tomorrow. Our SMEs want to adopt AI so they can innovate, grow and create good jobs here in Canada. Can the government explain how Canada's “AI for All” strategy will enable Canadians to take full advantage of the economic benefits of this technological revolution?

Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to Dr. Nacim Haddad, whom I welcomed today at my Hill office. Dr. Haddad is an artist, physicist and a keeper of memories. He is at the crossroads of nuclear physics, art and communication, devoting his work to promoting the musical art of Aita. Aita is a traditional musical art form from the Kingdom of Morocco. It carries a collective soul that has been passed down from generation to generation. Through his Ayta World Tour, Dr. Haddad infuses the art of Aita with a contemporary spirit that is worthy of its great history. Dr. Haddad brings together past and present, tradition and creativity. I would also like to commend Richesses culturelles Montréalaises for its invaluable support of this cultural initiative and for its commitment to supporting initiatives like these that bring various Canadian cultures closer together. I hope that Dr. Nacim Haddad receives a level of recognition that matches his talent.