Parliamentary Speeches

Mr. Speaker, it is good to see you, as always. I rise in the House today on behalf of the beautiful, wonderful people of Bowmanville—Oshawa North, to oppose the Liberal budget, specifically Bill C-30. I do so because this is the latest example of the current Liberal regime failing to meet the moment in Canada. The Liberals are simply tinkering at the edges of the status quo, without offering any positive, substantive changes for our communities to become stronger and healthier. Liberals may ask, what is the moment we are in? Certainly, they seem unaware. It is a moment when a generation of Canadians are knocking on the door, asking to be admitted into the Canadian dream, yet they are having that door shut in their face by a government that continues to show very little self-awareness for what is going on in our economy today. For Canadians who, frankly, have been working hard for over a decade now to establish themselves in the economy, to buy their first home or to start a family, they are encountering an uncomfortable and unstable position. They are working hard to do so, despite the challenges they face. If the Liberal regime were truly interested in meeting the moment facing our country right now, they would do more than just tinker at the edges of the status quo. Rather, this would be a government that would respond with real change and real hope for the builders, the dreamers, the strivers and the hustlers who are working hard to get ahead every day. The part of this budget that I would like to focus on in particular is the matter of housing, because it has become emblematic of the challenges we face in our country today. In this budget, in Bill C-30, the government has a provision to extend the grace period for repayments in the homebuyers' plan. Now, in a vacuum, this might actually be a worthwhile idea. It is good to extend the grace period. However, the problem we face is that when we look at the context of our country right now, it is simply not enough. In fact, it is outrageous to sit in the chamber and see Liberals patting themselves on the back for continuing to fail to fix the housing crisis in this country, while failing to recognize that much more needs to be done. While Liberals sit in the chamber or fly off to Europe to celebrate their half measures and their band-aid solutions, one of their own housing bureaucracies, one of several, has published data today showing that the housing crisis continues to be unaddressed by the Liberal Prime Minister, who promised to fix it, the second Liberal Prime Minister, I may add, who promised to fix it in the last decade. From today's CMHC housing starts and construction data, we see that in the month of May 2026, “Actual monthly housing starts were down 5.2% year-over-year in centres with a population of 10,000 or more”. We also see in that data that “housing starts for all areas in Canada decreased [month to month by] 6% in May”. CMHC's deputy chief economist looked at all of this data and offered a comment that I think this House must consider. He said, “Overall, these results suggest that construction activity is uneven and taken together with the decline of approved units not yet started and market intelligence point to weaker momentum for future supply”. If we zoom out for a moment and think about what this means for the young Canadians knocking on the door who want to get in on the Canadian dream but are having the door shut on them by the Liberal regime, we see that there are real consequences for real people behind all of these numbers. For every house that is not getting built or is too expensive for the average middle-class Canadian to afford, we know there is a life being put on hold: people who want to move out of their parents' house but cannot do so; people who want to make an investment in their future but cannot do so; people who want to start a family but cannot do so. By the way, as an aside, I would like to add that if we fix the housing crisis, we might see the declining birth rate start to tick up and the Liberals would have less of an excuse to continue with their mass immigration plan. However, I will leave that for another day. This is what is happening to young Canadians today. They deserve so much better than what they are getting from the Liberal government, from a regime that continues to put budget after budget forward that fails to solve a single serious problem and is not getting better results. Young Canadians are not getting the response they deserve from their own government, the government they pay taxes to and the government that is intended to serve them. I would like to share a story of a young man I met yesterday, from north Oshawa. He runs his own business, and on the weekends he drives an Uber. He is a very hard-working guy who grinds every week, non-stop. He recently got married, and he does not have any children yet, but he hopes to be able to afford a home one day. He shared his family story with me, and he is a real family man. He told me about his father who recently beat cancer, and I could see how proud he was when he talked about his dad going through that hard time with a smile on his face on the other end of it. This business owner in north Oshawa told me that he had a conversation with his wife last week, and he asked his wife an important question. He asked what she thought of some of the concerns weighing on him at the moment. Specifically, he was wondering whether he should continue to work so hard and continue to work two jobs and be away from his family as much as he is. He wondered if he should stop. He wondered if his effort was ever going to pay off based on what he saw happening in our country. I will be honest; it was tough to hear him talk that way, because he is a talented and very capable young man, but he was considering giving up. He told me that when he had that conversation with his wife and asked her those questions, she thankfully told him that she thought he should keep trying. She expressed belief in him. When he told me about his wife's confidence in him, I could tell it meant the entire world to him. I bring this up because people need to better understand what is happening to this generation of Canadians knocking on that door and trying to get in on the Canadian dream. They are often thinking about giving up and often questioning the merit of hard work. They are second-guessing themselves and the way they spend their time, and whether doing all of the things they were told a contributing citizen should do is actually going to bear fruit as they continue to get older. This is exactly what is wrong with the Liberal regime's budget. It fails to offer any sort of understanding of what is going on today. It fails to show any contrition from a government that has, for 11 years now, made bad decision after bad decision, often sentencing young Canadians to a much harder life than generations past, making it harder to get ahead and making it harder for people to feel hopeful and optimistic about their futures. The Liberal regime then has the audacity to question the patriotism of people who say that they deserve better. I would say that the young Canadians knocking on the door hoping to get in on the Canadian dream do deserve better. They deserve a lot better than what they have been getting. My message to all of the strivers, dreamers, builders and hustlers across this country is to just keep going. I know that it is hard and that often it feels like people in positions of power are not listening, but the reality is that we have no choice but to continue fighting for this country and for a better future. Even when the people who are privileged enough to fly first class to Europe lecture us on what kind of country we should want to have here in Canada and even when they show us how tone-deaf they are, I want those who are fighting for a better future to know that someday I hope they will have a government that honours them properly. God bless Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I agree with Premier Ford on very little actually, including his opinions of the Liberal regime here in Ottawa and its performance on matters like housing. It is quite unfortunate that it is so difficult to get the people who profit and benefit off the status quo to understand why so many Canadians are frustrated with multiple levels of government, provincial and federal alike. It is also unsurprising that the federal government would find common cause with a provincial government that also seems to be perfectly fine with a situation where no one's life is getting better and the quality of life for the average middle-class Canadian is declining.

Mr. Speaker, I will be perfectly blunt with the member. We have a lot of problems in this country, and I think we have a government here in Ottawa that has used the drama with the United States as an excuse to solve very few problems that affect the day-to-day lives of our fellow citizens. I think it is shameful that it has become a political tool to exploit justifications for making nothing better for the lives of the average Canadian. Instead, the Liberals are able to position themselves as fake nationalists who seemingly have very little pride or long-term vision for the good of this country. I would like to see some humility on the part of the Liberal regime here in Ottawa. I would like to actually get a trade deal done for the good of Canadian workers and Canadian industries, and for the Liberals to stop exploiting this issue for their own political gain.

Mr. Speaker, the member for London—Fanshawe's observations are completely accurate. We have a government here that has been sitting around for 11 years watching the decline of a country and, in many cases, managing the decline of a country. People naturally are increasingly frustrated by a status quo that is not working and is not serving the best interests of our people. We have seen members opposite sit there, heckle, laugh and high-five each other while things keep getting worse for the average middle-class family. I would like to see them show any sense of contrition or learn from their mistakes. Alas, I have not seen that evidence.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of Canadians who are concerned with the continued economic mismanagement of our country and who are observing that the Liberal government is using its majority of seats now in the House of Commons to continue mismanaging our economy and putting young Canadians in a tough position. Canadians are looking for accountability, and they are looking to have confidence in the democratic process renewed by having the Parliament of Canada Act amended so that MPs who have left their party and crossed the floor, handing the Liberal Prime Minister a majority, will have to face their voters in a by‑election.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition in support of Conservative bill, Bill C-218, also known as the right to recover act. Canadians are rightly concerned about the Liberal government's plans to expand euthanasia to people whose only medical condition is a mental illness. With this petition, they are urging the government to change course, to not expand euthanasia to even more people and, instead, turn to offering more services and more accessible health care.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today on behalf of my constituents of Bowmanville—Oshawa North to oppose Bill C-9 and to support efforts to further scrutinize and study the legislation. I will be sharing my time with the member for York Centre. There are many problems with Bill C-9 and the Liberal attempt to amend Bill C-9 to criminalize the reading and sharing of Bible verses in this country. We oppose this for many reasons, but I do want to draw attention to an area that has not gotten enough attention: the efforts of the Liberal Party to enact a form of cultural imperialism on Christians, Muslims and Jews in this country. I want to share an academic definition of “cultural imperialism” because I am sure many members of the House probably are not used to hearing that term to describe what the Liberal Party is attempting to do to citizens of our country. This definition comes from EBSCO, a research database. Published in 2024, the definition reads: Cultural imperialism refers to the imposition of one culture's values, beliefs, and practices over another, often leading to the erosion of the latter's unique cultural identity.... It manifests through various mediums, including education, religion, and media, where dominant cultures often shape and redefine the social and ethical frameworks of less dominant societies.... Cultural imperialism causes changes that are usually faster than would otherwise occur, and in a direction that benefits those from the dominant or influencing culture. The faster pace can mean that the changes have a destabilizing effect on other aspects of the culture, and the association of the changes with benefits accruing to members of the dominant culture, taken together mean that one party is benefiting from actions that are harmful to others. I share this definition to provide some context for what I believe the Liberal Party is doing right now. It has been in power for over a decade and has tried its very best to exercise influence over every institution in this country. It has abused the power of the federal government to impose its values, beliefs and practices on as many institutions in our country as it possibly can. Today we see evidence of that through Bill C-9 and the Liberal effort to amend Bill C-9, an effort to exercise that cultural imperialism over churches, mosques and synagogues. I have provided an academic definition of cultural imperialism, but I would also like to provide a pop culture reference. In the hit song from last year, Kendrick Lamar's Not Like Us, Lamar uses some language to describe colonial thinking, in his diss track to Drake. He says: ...you not a colleague, you a...colonizer That is precisely what the Liberal Party is attempting to do to Christians, Muslims and Jews in this country. Liberals are not treating the diverse communities of our country with any degree of respect. They are not treating them like colleagues, listening to them, working with them and respecting their traditions and faiths. Instead they are behaving like colonizers, attempting to abuse state power to exercise undue influence by attempting to criminalize things that families in this country have believed in since the very founding of this nation by the English and the French. The Liberals will make, of course, as they have made throughout this morning and afternoon, efforts to characterize our concerns over the legislation as theatrics, but I bring it back to the actual language used by the now Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, who was promoted by the Prime Minister after he made the following comments. As chair of the justice committee, on October 30, he said that three books of the Bible, Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Romans, are hateful. The minister used the language of hate to describe verses in the Bible that people have prayed over, read to their children and shared in communities all across this country for a very long time. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which the Liberal Party pretends, and I emphasize “pretends”, to care about, enshrines the right to religious freedom precisely as a sign of respect for the fact that there are things the government should not have its fingerprints on. The government should not make its way into churches, mosques and synagogues in an effort to bring Liberal values, nor use the criminal justice system to enforce Liberal values on the private religious lives of Canadian citizens, but that is precisely what a colonizer would do. That is precisely what a cultural imperialist would do. They would look at churches, mosques and synagogues and ask how the federal government can make its way in there. It is wrong, it is unethical and it is against the traditions of this country. It is an insult to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. One thing I have observed in the relatively short time I have been a member of Parliament is that the Liberal Party does something that I do not know what to name; perhaps it is mind games or false presentation. It is making an effort to convince Christians, Muslims and Jews of various cultural backgrounds that they respect them. The Liberals make an effort to show they want to hear them and welcome them into Canadian politics. I have seen with my own eyes Liberals in the Toronto area running around at cultural events and holidays, eating samosas and jerk chicken and pretending they respect people from diverse community backgrounds. They run around offering people DEI slogans like “Diversity is our strength.” They say all kinds of funny things, like “diversity, vote for me”. I know the kind of attitude they bring around our communities. What do they do when they come to Ottawa? They want to culturally imperialize the people of this country and their children. They actually have no respect for diversity at all, and any Christians, Muslims, or Jews whose ancestors come from any part of the world must be able to unite in recognizing that the Liberal Party has no respect for our religions, our traditions or our values. The Liberals believe that the federal government is superior to us, and they believe they have the right to impose their values on our churches, mosques and synagogues. When we talk about the language of colonizers and cultural imperialists, we have to recognize that when they attack scripture, when they attack the Bible, when they attack our religions and when they try to justify bringing the criminal justice system into our places of worship, they are trying to strip away the things that make us well-rounded people. To them we are simply economic inputs. We should have no culture. They believe we should have no meaning in our lives. They offer us nihilism. They offer us the chance to be a column on a spreadsheet used to calculate GDP. That is all they think of us and of the efforts we make to be well-rounded people, to be part of a community, to believe in something, to have conviction and to be connected to the traditions of our fathers, our mothers, our grandfathers and our grandmothers. They ridicule and they insult. They call it hateful to believe that we come from something. However, we stand on the shoulders of giants who sacrificed for us to be here. They sacrificed for us to have the life we have today, and we will not denounce the very people who have made our lives possible. We will not denounce the cultures and traditions they come from. We will not sit here quietly and idly while the Liberal Party seeks to call our ancestors hateful. We will not accept that. We will reject their cultural imperialism. We will call them colonizers when they behave like colonizers. In closing, I will suggest that one of the reasons the Liberals denigrate Canadian history, one of the reasons they keep the Canadian flag at half-mast for a year, and one of the reasons they support teaching our children in this country that our country should be ashamed of its own history, is that they are embarrassed by what they see in the mirror. They have not learned the lessons from history, and they repeat the mistakes made in history of colonizing and imperializing over other people.

Mr. Speaker, I talked about Liberal colonizers and Liberal imperialists, just to clarify the record. To my colleague from Quebec, what I would say is that the Bloc Québécois has represented their efforts here in this chamber as pushing back on the encroachment of the federal government. In this situation, with Bill C-9 and the amendment, the Bloc Québécois is actually asking the federal government to have more power over the lives of Quebeckers and all Canadian citizens. I would think that would be an area where the Bloc Québécois and Conservatives would agree: no abuse of federal state power.

Mr. Speaker, what is uniting faith leaders and faith communities across Canada is concern that we have a Liberal federal government right now that does not understand the boundaries over its own power. Instead of being humble enough to recognize that people who are sick or struggling in communities across our nation rely on churches, mosques and synagogues as a source of support and strength, the Liberal government instead looks at these institutions and wonders how it can exercise more state power over every function of our lives and communities. It is wrong, and it must be opposed.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to provide some perspective on the Liberal government's 2025 federal budget and its implementation. I have had the chance to speak with many of my constituents in Bowmanville—Oshawa North, and with Canadians across our country, to gather feedback on the vision for the future of Canada that is expressed by the Liberal government in the budget. I want to start with one of the signature items in the budget that we have heard Liberal members mention here in the chamber on many occasions as a point of pride. They mention it as a statement of progress, but the reality is that it is a huge red flag for what kind of economy the Liberal Prime Minister is intending to build. They mention the national school food program and the fact that they are introducing it as a permanent feature of the federal government, as a positive thing. They are even clapping now, showing how out of touch they really are. They say that they want to fund this for years to come, yet the concern that many Canadians have is that they do not want to be dependent on the federal government to feed their children. What they want to see from the federal government are efforts to bring down the cost of food. It is a fact that parents are having a tougher time affording food. It is a fact that, over the last decade, the cost of food has skyrocketed year to year. It is a fact that keeping up with grocery bills and other bills is a huge source of stress for Canadian families, as food bank lines get longer every month. In this situation, Canadians expect to see the federal government do everything in its power to bring down the cost of groceries. We saw in the lead-up to the budget that the Liberals were actually quite insincere in promising to work with other parties to solve our country's problems. In the lead-up to the budget, Conservatives provided multiple proposals for how the cost of food could be brought down, including proposals that would remove needless taxes on Canadian agriculture and food packaging, taxes that are passed on to the Canadian consumer at the grocery store. The Liberals did not want to work with us, and they did not want to adopt any of those proposals, which is their right. If they want to be obstructionist, that is a choice that they get to make here every day. There were other institutions in this country that also offered policy ideas to bring down the cost of food, such as Canada's Competition Bureau, which has been recommending for years that the federal government increase competition in the grocery industry to lower the cost of food. Of course, the Liberal budget did not include any references to that either. Instead, what did we get? We got a vision for the future of Canada by the Liberal Prime Minister that makes it clear that bringing down the cost of food is not their objective. In fact, what they want to do is normalize the idea that moms and dads cannot afford food for their own children and instead require government assistance in order to do that. We should all be alarmed by that because, for years and years, decades and decades, throughout our history, the federal government knew that its purpose was to create the conditions for families and communities to thrive, so that parents could buy their own food and provide food to their own children. What we have seen from the federal government is a significant shift in another direction, a shift away from that primary responsibility and instead toward the idea that families and communities need the government's help because the economy is so unaffordable. This is not what a healthy society is supposed to look like. In a healthy society, families and communities are independent enough from the government that if they do not like what the government is doing, they can very easily tell the government to kick rocks. That is not the vision for Canada that the Liberal Prime Minister articulates in his federal budget. In fact, the logic of the Liberal government was betrayed by the Liberal member for Vancouver Centre, when she criticized Conservatives by saying that we believe that “parents would prefer to feed their kids themselves rather than have the government feed them.” That is true. We do believe that. We believe that the vast majority of moms and dads across the country feel the exact same way. The vision that the Liberals are articulating is not one of compassion. It is one of dependence. They have sold the national school food program and its permanency as a compassionate and noble idea. Let us continue to explore this vision for the future of Canada expressed by the Liberal Prime Minister in his budget. He says he wants to be compassionate. I would ask why then in this document, which is hundreds of pages, does the word “addiction” appear once? Why in the midst of an addiction crisis that is harming families all across this country, harming people of all generations and destabilizing our communities would a compassionate government, as the Liberals say they are, pay such little attention to such a crisis? I would argue it is because the Liberals are frankly not as compassionate as they would like us to believe. In fact, the one time they do mention addiction in their federal budget, they make a point to say that the federal transfers to provinces to deal with this issue will remain the same over the next several years, which means, even though we have a piling amount of evidence that the addiction crisis is getting worse, they actually offer no new money for this. This has been a very serious issue in my community of Bowmanville—Oshawa North. As I visited young people across this country, it is one of the top issues I heard from students because they all know somebody who has been affected by the addiction crisis. We have seen, since January 2016, over 53,000 opioid toxicity deaths. In the first three months of this year, over 1,300 people died because of opioid overdoses, yet in a budget that shows the vision for this country, the federal government has decided to pay very little attention, offering no new resources and no vision for how we will help our friends and neighbours overcome their challenges. That is not what compassion looks like, so forgive me for calling their bluff when they say they care a lot and are leading with their hearts because, in a budget that increased the federal deficit annually to over $80 billion, they could not spare a single extra penny for this problem. Let us further explore the Liberals' vision for the future of Canada, because the Liberal Prime Minister also presented his 2025 federal budget as if it is about sovereignty, strength and nation building. That is what the Liberals say, yet we see, snuck into the budget on page 100, a very interesting and, for many people across our country, alarming idea. It states, “The government will also consider options for the privatisation of airports.” That is critical public infrastructure that a truly sovereign and strong country would take very seriously, yet the Liberal government sneaks in the idea of selling it off to private interests as one line in the budget, hoping that, in the hundreds of pages, people probably will not pay enough attention. They certainly did not mention that when they asked Canadians to vote for them in April. The Liberal Minister of Transport received a letter from the national president of Unifor expressing concern over this idea, concern I have also heard from many of the unionized workers who I am proud to represent in Bowmanville—Oshawa North. In that letter, the president of Unifor wrote, “Canada's airports are vital economic hubs and public assets. They require public investment and democratic stewardship, not divestment to private interests.” Once again, the claims by the Liberals that they are concerned with sovereignty and strength are betrayed in the 2025 federal budget. I look forward to seeing the Liberal Minister of Transport respond to that letter and explain to the Canadian people what exactly the government means by considering privatizing critical public infrastructure. My point remains that, as we explore the vision articulated for the future of our country, it is not what the Liberals have honestly presented. In fact, it is an alarming one, one where affordability is not resolved. Their vision is one where more families are dependent on the government to feed their children. It is a vision where the addiction crisis does not get the attention it deserves. It is a vision where big issues like the privatization of public infrastructure are mentioned as throwaway ideas by a government misrepresenting itself as being concerned with our sovereignty and our strength. This is why I oppose the federal budget and why we should all be very concerned about its implementation.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite's continuing to affirm that we are correct when we say the Liberal government does not have a vision for the strength and independence of communities and families. Rather, it continues to present federal government dependency as a solution to the very economic problems that have been created under Liberal leadership over the last decade. One would think that the member just showed up but, as he mentioned, he has been a politician since 1988. I was a one-year-old when he first got elected. With every problem that has been created in the last decade, the government positioned itself as a solution, not seeing the irony in this vicious, weird cycle and vortex of bad public policy.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to plug the fantastic work done by food banks in my home community of Bowmanville—Oshawa North. The Clarington East Food Bank, the Salvation Army food bank and the St. Joseph's food bank, are full of great volunteers committed to making sure that the problems created in our economy by bad stewardship and bad leadership here in Ottawa can be resolved by the wonderful charity and hard work of wonderful people in my community.

Mr. Speaker, the member for Oshawa serves her constituency incredibly well. We have a very serious unemployment problem in our part of the country, and this is also affecting all parts of the country. We also have a very serious youth unemployment problem. I want to stress to everyone listening in the House that I speak to young people all the time. They see what is happening. They work hard. They go to school. They hope to have a career and a future, to own a home, start a family, start a business or do whatever they want to do for whatever their dreams are, yet they are constantly seeing evidence that it is only going to get harder. In the 2025 federal budget, we see an out-of-touch government thinking that young people want to see more state dependency as a solution to their problems. However, they want to thrive as independent people.

Mr. Speaker, Liberals have banned the vast majority of nicotine pouches for sale in Canada, despite the fact that many Canadians use these products to help quit smoking. Canadians just want to go to the corner store, the gas station or wherever cigarettes are sold and choose an alternative product. Even the Neighbourhood Pharmacy Association of Canada agrees. When will the Liberals do the right thing? When will the Liberals free the Zyn?

Mr. Speaker, the very same government that likes to push so-called safe supply drugs into our communities now wants to point out nicotine as a problem for adult usage. Health Canada set a target for 2035 to reduce the number of Canadians smoking to less than 5%. The government should have no excuses for making alternatives to cigarettes available wherever cigarettes are sold, such as corner stores, gas stations, wherever. The question remains. When will the Liberals do the right thing? When will they free the Zyn?

Mr. Speaker, today, we have thousands upon thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of young Canadians who have done exactly what they were asked to do. They went to school. They studied hard. They gave their best effort on the promise that, at the end of all that, they would be able to get a job and start a career. What they are experiencing right now is a broken promise by their government. They are experiencing a job market that is lacking in jobs and opportunities. In fact, many are feeling overwhelmingly anxious right now when they think about what their future holds. It is heartbreaking to see and hear, and many of us in the House see and hear that from our constituents on a regular basis. For me, in Bowmanville—Oshawa North, I hear that very often from students at Durham College and Ontario Tech who have worked very hard and gotten good grades. They really should be feeling excited about what awaits them, yet they are anxious every single day. We know the unemployment crisis facing young people, where we have 460,000-plus Canadians between the ages of 15 and 24 looking for work, has exacerbated many of the issues young people are already facing in this country. Boys and young men in particular are disproportionately shouldering a burden for very many social and cultural problems right now, including opioid overdoses, suicides and homelessness. They are victims of violent crime and dropping out of high school. The unemployment crisis makes all of those things even worse. I myself was once a young man struggling in the school system, labelled illiterate by the Ontario public schools for failing a literacy test in grade 10. I know for a fact that if not for the chance to work, I might have never finished high school and I might not be standing here right now. For years, I found work in restaurants, at Red Lobster and other places, working as a dishwasher or a line cook. It was not glamorous at all. Scraping seafood off pots and pans is not the stuff people dream about doing one day, but the skills I learned, the personal attributes I gained from working at night made up for all the things I was not able to learn and do during the day in a classroom. When we see these statistics about young people not having jobs, it is more than just not having a paycheque every week or every two weeks; it is also a sign of young people being robbed of the personal development and growth that is necessary for the future leaders of our country. The research is very clear on this: when one works as a young person, they learn things they might not learn anywhere else in their life. They learn responsibility, time management and conflict resolution. They learn how to be responsible for other people, how to work as a team, social skills and personal development that is essential, personal development that, when it is lacking, becomes a problem for all of us, because we all depend on the young people of today to be leaders for our country in the future. I have been worried for quite some time that young people would internalize the bad economy created as a result of 10 years of Liberal policy, and they would blame themselves for the lack of opportunity in front of them. I have worried for a long time that young people would think they had made mistakes or think they had made the wrong choices and that is why they are struggling in the economy right now. This is one of the reasons I have been visiting university and college campuses across Ontario and soon the rest of the country. It is precisely to hear them out and hear what is going on, what is weighing on their hearts and their minds, but also to deliver a very clear message: It is not their fault. In fact, the economy they see before them right now is a result of a series of bad choices and bad policies made by people in positions of power. Liberal politicians, corporate bigwigs on Bay Street and bureaucrats here in Ottawa have consistently put the interests of the next generation of leaders in this country on the back burner to serve all sorts of, frankly, bizarre ideological agendas. Young people need to know this, because we do not want young people to feel discouraged and demoralized. We want them to know that better choices are possible, a better future is possible and, in fact, how we get to that better future, in many ways, can depend on their being involved in our democracy and our political process and their gaining the ability to be leaders in this country to make decisions for our institutions that would be forward-thinking and not backward-looking. I believe that when we talk about the choices made by people in positions of power, it is helpful to be specific. Here today, we have heard about some of the policies that have been enacted by the government for the last decade that have held back our economy from the necessary growth required for young people to have jobs and careers. We have heard about the anti-resource policies, high taxes and heavy red tape. We have heard also about the fact that the labour market has been completely misaligned, not just at the post-secondary level but also when it comes to immigration policy. When I visit university and college campuses, I hear that young Canadians across this country know that small tinkering at the edges of the status quo is far from enough to create the changes necessary for young people to be optimistic and hopeful about their future. Small programs and small policy changes by a government that is pretending right now that it is different from what this country has had for the last decade are simply not going to get the job done. Young people know that real, serious, substantive changes are required and there may be no better example of that than immigration policy. We saw here in this very chamber, just a few hours ago, the Liberal government once again double down on irresponsible and unsustainable immigration policy, creating a new system of unlimited chain migration; doubling down on the very policies the Liberals pretend they want to fix. When the time comes to exercise their power to fix the system they have broken, they continually fail and demonstrate that they have learned nothing from 10 years of breaking an immigration system that was once heralded as the envy of countries around the world. This very day, just hours ago, the Liberals once again voted for Liberal immigration policies, not knowing and not being able to answer to the people of this country how many new people would be entering this country as a result of this legislation. Young people know very clearly, because they have eyes and they have ears, that things have changed dramatically in this country and they feel it every time they apply for a job. They can see that we have too many people, not enough houses; too many people, not enough jobs; and too many people, not enough public services. They are being asked to turn a blind eye to the reality they see in front of them every day and pretend that the government has their best interests in mind, which is simply not true. I have encountered, on these college and university campuses, people from across the political spectrum, some who voted for us in the last election, some who did not; some who vote regularly and some who have never voted before. However, the common thread among the students with whom I have spoken, a thread that I wish were visible here in the House of Commons, is an understanding that change is required and the status quo simply is not working. Young people are bearing the brunt of failed policy for over a decade and they are asking for something new. They are asking for something different. When we talk about youth employment, job losses and what is happening to the next generation of leaders in this country, we are talking about the need for change. I mean real change; I do not mean changing the leader of a party and pretending that it is a new government.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for demonstrating precisely my point earlier, which is that young people across this country are hungry for a political movement and a government that are forward-looking, yet we see quite clearly from the Liberals that they are still looking at the past. They are unwilling to accept any responsibility for 10 years of mismanaging this country and its economy. Instead, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is still occupying their psyche. It is disturbing. The years the member is talking about are times when I was a student working at Red Lobster, yet we are trying to talk about how we plan for the future of young people today. I look forward to seeing the member at the national forum to end Liberal racism, on November 17.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is precisely right. He has observed the same thing as I and many people across our country have, which is that the Liberals refuse to take any responsibility for their own policies. They have been in government for over a decade, yet when they speak, one would think they had showed up just yesterday. They take no responsibility. They cannot even have any degree of humility to apologize to the young people in this country for what they have done to their opportunities and for what they have done to the economy in which young people are now entering the labour market. I would love to see some humility, and I know I am not the only one. Many Canadians would love to see some humility from the Liberals. Unfortunately it is not their strong suit.

Mr. Speaker, the reality is this: There are jobs that traditionally and historically were an entry point for young people to join our economy, to earn their first paycheque, to learn their skills, to find a place where they belong and, from there, to grow in all sorts of different directions. The temporary foreign worker program, over the course of decades, became a way to deny young people jobs they ordinarily would have, to pay people a cheaper wage. That is the reality, and anyone who goes to a Tim Hortons across this country will see the evidence of it themselves. It is important for the economy to be tied to the young people in this country. It is important for Canada's economy to see its health as tied to the health of our young people, but when large corporations can bypass our young people and bring in people from elsewhere to occupy entry-level positions, it drives down the wages of young people and divorces our economy from young people.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin my comments about Bill C-3 today by first recognizing the great work done by Quebeckers to shift the conversation about immigration in our country to a more positive direction. I want to congratulate Quebec nationalists. For several years now, Quebeckers have not been afraid to talk about immigration, identity and integration. More needs to be done to improve our immigration system. I thank them for their courage. One of the Quebeckers I would like to acknowledge is a great young man from the beautiful city of Montreal, Mr. Anthony Koch, who took to the pages of the National Post this summer to identify his concerns about an issue that is holding Canada back from having a common-sense conversation about immigration policy. I would like to read some of the words from Mr. Koch for the benefit of those in the House. He wrote: The fact that my grandparents were immigrants does not mean I must support mass immigration forever. It does not mean I must stand aside while my country becomes unrecognizable. It does not mean I must endorse the strain on schools, hospitals, housing markets and communities that unsustainable immigration levels brings in the name of some imaginary moral debt I never incurred. I owe nothing to the people who use my heritage as a weapon. I want to thank Mr. Koch for his words. I would like to highlight his point about how the heritage of the descendants of immigrants is often used by the Liberals as a weapon to wedge us, corner us and make us feel as though we have to agree with their immigration policies. It is immoral, and it is important to note that it is observable in the debates about Bill C-3, formerly known as Bill C-71, in the House. Members may know I like to do my homework. I combed through the transcripts of the debates on Bill C-3 and found numerous examples of Liberal and NDP MPs making reference to their heritage as immigrants or as the descendant of immigrants, as if that necessitates a certain perspective or position on Bill C-3. Some examples came from the MPs for Vancouver Granville, Kingston and the Islands, Spadina—Harbourfront and Vancouver East, all of whom made reference in the House to their own family heritage or immigration history as if it were relevant to their positions on Bill C-3. That is a textbook example of what Mr. Koch wrote about. It is the tendency of Liberals to weaponize one's heritage against them. I would go so far as to say that it is a textbook example of Liberal racism, which has run amok here in Ottawa. I would like to explain this further, and I will explain my own family history to provide some contrast. My father came to this country from Kenya. Someone could make a movie about my father's life. He was born an orphan in Nairobi. He is a Black African man who is very proud of his heritage. He was adopted by an Ismaili family and reorphaned as a teenager, and he had to teach himself how to be a man. He came to this country and worked in hotel restaurants and kitchens. It was hard work and hard labour that took a toll on his body, which one can see in him today. I can assure members that my father did not do all of that hard work so that one day, some smug Liberals in Ottawa could tell his son he has to support Liberal immigration policies and the cheapening of Canadian citizenship. My grandfather came to this country from Scotland after World War II. He was broke. He had empty pockets. He had not a dollar to his name. He got a good, union job working as a school custodian with the Toronto District School Board. When everyone else went home for the evening, he was still there, working, mopping the floors and cleaning the classrooms so that children had a nice place to learn the next day. I can assure members that he did not mop those floors and clean those classrooms so that one day, some smug Liberals in Ottawa could tell his grandson he has to support Liberal immigration policies and the cheapening of Canadian citizenship. My grandma came to this country from Ireland after World War II decimated her neighbourhood in Belfast. She came here and met my grandpa, and together, they raised four children. She helped raise grandbabies. She attended church every Sunday. She loved this country and she loved Jesus Christ. She did not do all that work raising children so that one day, some smug Liberals in Ottawa could tell her grandbaby he has to support Liberal immigration policies and the cheapening of Canadian citizenship. My point is that my family came here to be part of this country. They came here to be free people, which means that we get to have points of view that are different from the Liberals' on important issues, including immigration and citizenship. We are free to say what we believe is best for the future of this country as equal Canadians. The idea that our heritage would be used against us to push us around and make us feel like we have to endorse their broken policies, which have led to public trust and confidence in the immigration system being the lowest they have ever been in my lifetime, is wild. We reject the weaponization of our heritage. We reject Liberal racism. They can kick rocks. I do not want to hear it. It is a new day in the House of Commons. It is a new day in this country, where people from all diverse religious and cultural backgrounds can stand with confidence and say they reject Liberal immigration policies. We do not agree with them. We do not agree with what they have done to the system. We are building a diverse and beautiful movement. In my home community of Bowmanville—Oshawa North, people from all religious and cultural backgrounds are coming together and unifying in opposition to what the Liberals have done to immigration in this country. People who grew up speaking English at home and people who learned English much later on in life are building bridges and talking to each other about what has gone wrong with immigration policy in this country. The Liberals will pay lip service to that and pretend they are making changes, yet we see what is happening in the House right now with Bill C-3. They are doubling down on the very irresponsible and unsustainable approach to immigration that has gotten us to this point. It is a serious problem, and they make light of it. They think they can tell us, because we are the descendants of immigrants, that we have to line up behind them. No. That is not happening. My grandparents and my father did not work this hard so that we could be pushed around by these guys, and it is not going to happen anymore. The point I would like to reiterate is that we have very serious problems in the immigration system. If the Liberals want to assure the public they can have trust and confidence that the Liberals can fix the problems, doubling down on the same direction is the wrong way to go. Putting forward legislation and not being able to assure the Canadian people how many individuals will be entering our country as a result of it is them doubling down on the very same broken approach. They are putting forward legislation, and they cannot tell us how many new people would come into our country, despite the overcrowded hospitals, not having enough houses and enough jobs, and traffic in the GTA getting worse and worse every day. We are supposed to sit back and accept that the very same people who broke the system want to continue going in the wrong direction, and we are not supposed to say anything about it because we are the descendants of immigrants. No. That is unacceptable. In conclusion, I would like to acknowledge the good work done by Conservative members on the immigration committee here in Ottawa to present some common-sense amendments to try to salvage the bill and instill some sensibility into a piece of legislation that is horribly flawed. The bill reflects, once again, that the Liberals have learned nothing from the fact that public trust and confidence in our immigration system are at the lowest they have been in my lifetime.

Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleagues on the immigration committee put forward a series of amendments asking the Liberal government to make better decisions about immigration policy. The ball is now in the Liberals' court. Are they going to instill some common sense in the legislation or continue doubling down on the very approach that has broken the immigration system we have today? The member wants to bring up that I referenced my heritage. Let me reaffirm to the member what the point is. We cannot tell, even the Liberals, who love to believe they can, what someone thinks based on what they look like or where they come from. Two people can be descended from immigrants and have a debate about immigration policy. The Liberals do not get to ascribe to us what we are going to say and believe despite our heritage in this country. We are free people.

Mr. Speaker, I wish I could respond to my hon. colleague in French. I am working on it. I will get there at some point. I agree with my colleague across the way that the Liberal government pretends that it wants to work with people. It says all the time that it just wants to work with us, but it accuses the opposition parties of being obstructionist. We engage in the process that our constituents voted for us to come here and engage in. We present amendments and they pass through committee, yet the Liberals still say no. It is a sign. They are the obstructionists. The Liberals are the obstructionists here in Ottawa, and their approach to immigration is a perfect example. They pretend they want to change, and they go to their friends in the media and the media amplifies the message that they want to change direction. Look at the numbers. They speak for themselves. The Liberals have broken the system and they do not want to fix it.

Mr. Speaker, last week I travelled to four university campuses to hear from Canadian students, many of whom are feeling very anxious about their future in this economy. This week I listened to the Prime Minister speak to a group of students and lecture them on the need to make sacrifices, as if they had not already been asked to do so. His speech was tone-deaf and out of touch. Will the Prime Minister commit today to getting spending under control and stop putting the next generation of Canadians into even more debt?

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian people can hear more empty Liberal promises and more generational word salad, all of which adds up to more spending and more debt thrust upon the next generation of Canadian dreamers, builders, strivers and hustlers. The Prime Minister should not be lecturing young people about sacrifice; he should be listening to them and hearing their stories. Again I am going to ask, will the Prime Minister commit today to getting spending under control so young people can afford to get ahead in life?

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today as a survivor of stage 4 cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in particular. I bring that up because it greatly shapes my perspective on the legislation we are discussing today. When I was sick and going through chemotherapy and radiation treatment, it was taxing on me as a person emotionally, physically, mentally and spiritually, but the hardest part of it was seeing my mother endure it all. My mom is a strong woman and a woman of faith, but for any parent, seeing a child go through a serious illness hits very hard. I remember vividly the fear and anxiety in my mother's eyes. I remember her face when I was going in for a lumbar puncture, PET scan or blood work, and saw the impact that me being in that position had on her. It was one of the haunting moments of the whole ordeal for me. What my family went through in those years was just a fraction of the pain and anguish that a family goes through when they lose a child. What my family went through was just a fraction of the pain and anguish that parents go through when they lose a young child in particular. I am very happy to stand here today to express my complete support for Bill C-222, Evan's law. I think the government needs to do as much as it possibly can to support families, in particular to support grieving families, through difficult times. This legislation represents an important move in that direction. I want to acknowledge the hard work that was done to get this legislation here. I will start by acknowledging the member of Parliament for Airdrie—Cochrane, who has been an advocate on this issue for years. I also want to acknowledge the member of Parliament for Burnaby North—Seymour for bringing this bill to the House. I understand that he worked closely with the member for Burlington on it. I salute them and everybody else who has gotten this legislation to this point. To me, this is about the government fulfilling the promises it makes to families. If the government promises to provide parental leave benefits to a family, it should do so regardless of the circumstances changing, especially tragic circumstances, which I think most people would regard as deserving more support, not less. I hope the Liberal government hears my heart on this. I say this with zero criticism or opposition to the bill. I would like to propose a change to it that would expand the protection of parental leave benefits to more grieving families. Bill C-222 is specific to families grieving the loss of a child, and that is an incredibly important part of the changes to the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code. However, there are also families grieving in very similar situations but where a parent has passed away, and as a result, they are dealing with many of the same challenges that the current version of Bill C-222 seeks to remedy. Since we are having a conversation about making changes to the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code, I think it opens a window for us to extend consideration, generosity and empathy to grieving families in other situations as well. I raise this on behalf of some of my constituents in Bowmanville—Oshawa North, many of whom signed a petition on this very issue recently, a petition that was inspired by the difficult circumstances of a family that I represent. For the sake of their privacy, I will not say their names, but they brought their situation to my attention, and I believe that with an appropriate amendment, this bill could remedy the circumstances they have found themselves in. I want to share what those circumstances are. They were brought to my attention by the surviving husband of a woman who tragically passed away while on parental leave with their first daughter. The surviving husband contacted Service Canada to inform it of his wife's passing away. The remaining months of parental leave benefits were then promptly cut off for his family. Shortly after, the surviving husband received a bill from the CRA requiring him to repay the benefits he had received between the time of his wife's passing and the date when Service Canada was notified. I do not believe anyone in the House wants families facing unimaginable loss to go through that. I do not believe anyone in the House wants the CRA to be sending a bill to a grieving husband or wife. I do not believe anyone in the House wants Service Canada to be cutting off benefits promised to a family at a time when they are not only facing an unimaginable loss, but also dealing with the economic uncertainty and instability that comes with a parent passing away. My hope is that, in hearing this story, we might be able to work together on expanding this very empathetic and important piece of legislation to include families in these circumstances. At the request of my constituent, I would like to read a statement from him to help people get a better sense of how all of this impacted him and his family. He wrote to me and said, “My daughter lost her mom before her first birthday and that is a heavy weight for us to carry as a family for a lifetime. Maintaining benefit payments and extending some grace to those who find themselves in such an unfortunate position might make all the difference in the world to somehow who is already running on empty mentally, emotionally, physically and financially.” The spirit of Evan's law would be to protect and relieve grieving parents from an additional burden, and I think it would be appropriate to provide the same consideration in cases of death of a parent who is receiving parental leave benefits. Continuing these payments to the surviving spouse for the remainder of the approved benefit period would alleviate a significant burden on the small percentage of families who face these particular tragic circumstances. As I stand here in full support of Bill C-222, and I certainly look forward to enthusiastically voting in favour of it in this chamber, it is my belief that, by raising these important concerns about the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code, we have an opportunity to extend this consideration to more grieving families. I want to reiterate that I hope the Liberal government hears my heart on this. I say none of this as a criticism, and in fact, I look forward to the possibility of collaborating with the government on an amendment that would expand this consideration to more people. I am happy to have shared the story of some of my constituents who have been impacted by the policy status quo. I really do believe the core of this is asking governments to live up to the promises they make to families. I think we have to see that, when the government promises EI payments, or when the government promises parental leave benefits to a family, that promise should be seen through, from the beginning to the end, for the appropriate period of time. That money should never be clawed back. There should be no expectation that grieving families have to return money paid out in that period of time and, most importantly, that families know they can count on that money they have planned for, especially in a tragic situation where there has been a loss. I do hope we can give this amendment the consideration it deserves. I look forward to Bill C-222 supporting grieving families across our country.

Madam Speaker, freedom of expression is a special part of Canada's political and cultural tradition. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms says that everyone in our country has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. When any government seeks to limit or constrain these freedoms, it requires a special trust between the people of the country and that government. Ideally, the people know that when a government seeks to limit their expression, that government has their best interests in mind and that any effort to limit freedom of expression would be done so fairly and justly. Today, the Liberal government does not have that trust with many Canadians, and it is important that we understand why as we debate the merits of Bill C-9, in which the Liberal government is proposing new ways of limiting free expression in our dear country. A government that is deserving of trust would, of course, be one that is honest with the people of the country. Unfortunately, that is not the case with Bill C-9. Much of this legislation is duplicative of laws already on the books and does not adequately address the core reasons crime has increased. The problem of crime primarily requires the federal government to more earnestly enforce the laws we already have and support police officers to investigate crimes and lock up criminals. The Liberal government is, frankly, taking attention away from its very real enforcement problem as it pertains to criminal law and the justice system. Instead, it is distracting people with legislation and, in doing so, is not being straight up with the people of our country. A government that is deserving of trust with legislation like Bill C-9 would be a government that treats all religious communities fairly, and that is not the case. In the rollout of Bill C-9, the Liberal government failed to mention anti-Christian bigotry in explaining how this legislation would address increases in hate in our country. Of course, anti-Christian bigotry has risen dramatically in recent years, as evidenced by over 100 churches being burned down or vandalized. In fact, the government's statements about Bill C-9 seem to go very far out of their way to avoid mentioning Christians and to avoid mentioning what has been happening to Christian communities across our country, despite mentioning other targeted communities. This is not a surprise to me, and probably not to many in this chamber, as when the Liberal government had an opportunity last year to support Conservative legislation to increase the penalty for arson against churches, which was known as Bill C-411, the Liberal government did nothing. It did not step up to work with us. It did not even articulate support for our efforts. We may recall Bill C-411, introduced by my Conservative colleague from Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, introduced mandatory minimum sentences for criminals attacking churches. It was a fantastic idea and an important part of any meaningful response to what has happened to churches across our country. Despite claims by the current Liberal government that it is something new and different from what we contended with last year, it continues to take the exact same approach to how it deals with Christians in our country, continuing to refuse to step up and take any action. Ultimately, it is important for Christians and non-Christians across our beautiful nation to ask why the Liberals seem unwilling to address the attacks on churches in Bill C-9, Bill C-411 or any bill for that matter. If we are being very honest, I think the answer is that the Liberals like to use their power in government to pick winners and losers. They like to decide who deserves attention and protection, who deserves to have their dignity affirmed and who does not. Liberals, frankly, do not see Christians as deserving of protection, and Bill C-9 is a very clear example of that, plain and simple, on paper. With that in mind, it is difficult to trust the Liberals to apply these new powers they seek to limit free expression in a way that is fair, just and the same for all Canadians. I anticipate Liberals saying that Bill C-9 is responding to the needs of religious communities by including language for the protection of Canadians who attend places of worship. Believe me, Madam Speaker: I would very much like to see more protections for Canadians who attend places of worship. In August, I submitted a motion to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to discuss precisely this issue. However, my concern with Bill C-9 is that the Liberals are taking a very real issue, which is that Canadians who attend places of worship need more protections, and using that very real issue to justify the expansion of their government's power to define what constitutes acceptable speech. Liberals have demonstrated, over their last decade in power, an intolerance for Christians and other Canadians who may disagree with them on important social and cultural issues. For that reason, I worry that the government will use the new powers it seeks under Bill C-9 to make it even more difficult for people in our great country to freely practise their faith. Importantly, it is not just Christians who have concerns about being excluded from Bill C-9; Hindus across our country do as well. I have personally heard from many Hindu Canadians in Bowmanville—Oshawa North and across Durham region, who have expressed concerns over how some of their religious symbols have been characterized in Bill C-9. There is concern for many in the Hindu community that the proposed legislation equates one of their sacred symbols with a symbol of hatred. They are not being treated fairly by the Liberal government either. Finally, it is very important to note another reason many Canadians do not trust the Liberal government. Under the Liberals' watch, the justice system has become weak and ineffective at protecting our communities. To have a trusting relationship with the public, especially if it has the audacity to ask the public to allow it to limit their free expression even further, the Liberal government should prove that it is willing to listen to cries for help from police officers asking for important justice reforms. Many criminals, whether they are motivated by hate or something else, could be off the street right now if the core problems in the justice system were adequately addressed. Canada needs a justice system that will be tougher on criminals, and that means having real consequences for breaking the law and hurting our people. I would like to share the words of Durham region's police chief, Peter Moreira, who offered a powerful statement on the topic of justice reform a couple of days ago. He said, “we must establish meaningful consequences that deter convicted individuals from reoffending. Offenders who endanger the public—whether through the use of weapons, threats or reckless driving—should be remanded into custody. Breaching bail conditions should disqualify individuals from future bail, especially when it's their third, fourth, or subsequent release. Bill C-75 began this dangerous trend of multiple releases.... We need justice reform that prioritizes the rights of law-abiding citizens over the 'rights' of repeat offenders.” In conclusion, it is obvious to anyone paying attention why Canadians would be uncomfortable with the Liberal government asking for more power over our lives, and their time would be better spent trying to fix the justice system they have broken.

Madam Speaker, it sounds as though I have offended the member opposite. Have I committed a hate crime now? Am I in trouble in terms of Bill C-9 because I have offended this gentleman? The reality is that instead of throwing all this vitriol toward me, he should ask his colleagues why they have left Christians and anti-Christian bigotry out of any of their public statements concerning Bill C-9. He should ask his colleagues why they refuse to acknowledge over 100 churches being burned down across our country. They will not lift a finger to do anything about it, even when we have given them plenty of opportunity. Save your energy and direct it to your own side of the aisle.

Madam Speaker, once again, all I am asking for is for Christians to be treated the same as everybody else, yet we can see the kind of reaction we get. Just saying the word “Christian” invokes a certain kind of energy in people in this chamber. I am very curious as to why that is. If the Liberal government introduces legislation, names a series of communities it is supposed to help but leaves Christians out, why am I the bad guy for mentioning it? Come on, get serious.

Madam Speaker, my colleague points to something very important for us to acknowledge: The effort by the Liberal government to downplay and dismiss anti-Christian bigotry is part of a much larger, broader pattern of behaviour to diminish the place of Christians and their feelings in our democracy. It has also introduced new ideas to take away charitable status from religious organizations. We have seen numerous petitions brought forward in the House to draw attention to that. We have given the Liberal government numerous opportunities to clearly state that it is going to protect the charitable status of religious organizations. It refuses to do so. This is a deep-rooted problem in the Liberal government. We can see why it is such a sensitive spot to bring up.

Mr. Speaker, I have a message today for every young man across Canada, every one who feels anxious about his future because he works hard and cannot get ahead and every one who wonders if the struggle is worth it: It is not their fault. They are not the problem in this country. In fact, they are a big part of the solution. They deserve better leadership in Canada. They deserve a government that empowers them to live up to their potential. The reality is that this is not the case right now. They deserve better, and a brighter future is possible, a future where they are valued and encouraged, a future where they are treated like a priority. We need them, and we need them to speak clearly, tell the truth, organize and be undeniable. We need them to help us restore the north.

Mr. Speaker, gun crime us up 130%, and Toronto police report that 88% of the illegal guns they seize have been smuggled north across our southern border. The Liberal public safety minister does nothing to keep our communities in the Toronto area safe. Instead, he focuses on banning legal hunting rifles in rural Canada. When will the Prime Minister take action, actually hold the minister accountable and fire him? He has done nothing to keep Toronto safe, and that is his job.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to raise very serious concerns about Liberal legislation, Bill C-3. This legislation proposes to create a new system of unlimited chain migration into Canada at a time when Liberal immigration policies have already skewed population growth to the point where public services are under great strain. I believe this is not only bad policy, but also immoral policy. The Liberals would like to make it easier for people who have never stepped foot in Canada to obtain Canadian citizenship. It is absurd. It is outrageous. The population growth the Liberals have already inflicted upon our country has put us in a vulnerable position on many fronts. The reality is that they want to hand Canadian citizenship out like candies at the counter. By treating Canadian citizenship this way, the Liberals will further increase the number of people who are trying to access social programs, housing and health care. This is already a growing problem where we have more people than we have services available for the people who are here. The quality of life for Canadians is threatened to be further eroded by Bill C-3. It would make many of the problems in our country even worse. I am particularly concerned about the implications this would have for our health care system, which is already in a state of degradation because of the surge in population growth across the country. We do not have enough hospitals. We do not have enough beds. We do not have enough doctors. We do not have enough nurses. The prospect of Liberals wanting to bring even more people into Canada is truly concerning to many. I would like to share with the House a story to illustrate just how population growth is lowering the quality of life for Canadians across this country, and it is a personal story of my family dealing with the hospital system. On Monday of last week, my dear mother, who I love, went into the hospital for hip replacement surgery. As has become the norm across Canada, she had to wait far too long for her surgery date. In fact, by the time my mother went in to have her surgery, the surgeon said the damage to her hip had reached the point of being a 10 out of 10. That means that my dear mother was dealing with a lot of pain for a long period of time while waiting for the chance to have a surgery that everybody in the health care system acknowledged she needed much more urgently than it was provided. The state of our health care system becomes even more clear with the experience we had in the hospital itself. The morning of the surgery, everything went smoothly. I was with my mom. The surgeon was awesome. The nurses were awesome. They took great care of her. We are very thankful for the excellent work they did. We are also very grateful to be in a country where someone does not have to go into debt to see a doctor. It was a very good experience in the morning. I was with my mom in the afternoon and in the evening. Around 10:00 p.m., I decided I was going to go home to get some sleep. I hit the 401. I was driving east on my way back home, and I got a phone call from my mom, who was frantic and upset. My mother is a very calm, cool and collected lady. She does not get upset easily, but she was freaking out. She was freaking out because she awoke from her rest while recovering from surgery to the sounds of hospital staff moving a male patient into her room. I appreciate that some people in the House might not see that as a big deal, but a lot of people across Canada would. When someone is recovering from a surgery in a hospital, they are in a physically vulnerable state and can barely move. The idea that hospital staff would move a dude into my mom's room in the middle of the night with no notice and no acknowledgement, and not even recognize that this was a bizarre and weird action to take to begin with, made my mom quite unhappy. The male patient who was moved into the room was also very uncomfortable with the situation. The only thing dividing them was a thin curtain pulled between the hospital beds. Naturally, when my mom is upset, it is like the bat signal going up. I got off the highway, headed westward and got back to the hospital. I went to speak to the supervising nurse. After some persistence, and I think, Madam Speaker, you know me well enough to know what my persistence might look like, the staff did move my mom to a new hospital room with a female patient. I asked the supervising nurse what the hospital policy was that allowed it to force a male patient and a female patient to share a room without their consent. The supervising nurse printed the policy off and handed it to me. I looked at it, and it was a policy that said that, due to overcrowding and under-resourced hospitals, the hospitals in Toronto had made the decision that they would have to give themselves that power. I am not of the belief that this makes it a good choice for them. I do not like the policy, but in that moment, I could see very practically what population growth has done to our hospitals. I did some research, and I found that this has become a common practice in hospitals all across Canada. They give themselves the ability to pair male and female patients in the same room against their will because they do not have enough space. A week later, after that whole ordeal, I came back to Ottawa, and what was the first thing on the legislative calendar? The Liberals want to make it easier to bring even more people into our country, increasing the demands on our health care system even further and continuing to demonstrate a quite objectively observable pattern of policy-making that indicates the Liberals would rather bring new people into this country than take care of the people who are already here. My mom and seniors like her built this country, paying taxes for decades on the promise that they would be looked after when they needed it. However, we have a series of policy choices continuously being made by the Liberal government to make life harder for people like my mom. Forgive me, but I cannot get down with that. It is not right. I appreciate that Liberal MPs may want to dismiss or deflect this. They might say this is a provincial issue, asking why we do not take it to the provincial government and claiming they have no responsibility. Well, my response to that would be this: Maybe that is a message they could deliver to the Prime Minister, as he is the one having fireplace chats with the Premier of Ontario. He is the one sipping Chardonnay by the fire with the man who is in charge of the government in this province. If the Liberals want to make health care funding an issue, by all means they should encourage the Prime Minister to do so. I am not able to. I do not get invited to the fireplace. I do not think the Speaker does either. Most Canadians do not get to go to the fireplace. What do we have control over in this House? We have the ability to control what we vote for and what we stand for. We get to represent our constituents and say to them that we are going to take a stand for what is right and what is good for the people of this country. With Bill C-3, the Liberals cannot even tell us how many new people they would bring into the nation. They cannot give us an answer. They expect us to just rubber-stamp their legislation when the basic information required to know how it would affect our families, our communities and the people who send us here to Ottawa is not being provided by the Liberal government. It is unacceptable. It is an unacceptable way to do business, and the reality is that the Liberals are going to continue this approach of valuing bringing more people in instead of taking care of the people who are already here. We will all lose. That is what will happen. We will all lose in that situation. My request of every Liberal MP here and every Liberal MP who might hear my words is for them to please do their job, please take care of the people of this country, join the Conservatives in pointing out how reckless Liberal policies are in growing our population and join the Conservatives in pointing out that, at minimum, the Canadian people deserve to know how many new people will be entering this country. My mother did not deserve what happened at the hospital. I do not think anybody's mother deserves it. That is a good enough reason to say this legislation is just not good enough.

Madam Speaker, with every dollar the Liberals claim to be spending, they are bringing more people here. There is a pretty basic way of understanding how the math works: When money is added to a system, demand is also added to that system, and then we expect to get better results. It is illogical, immoral and dishonest to pretend the Liberals' immigration policies are not adding to the burden of our health care system and making it harder for Canadians to get the health care they deserve.

Madam Speaker, I do not understand why the first question everybody is not asking is “How many people?” This is the primary point I am trying to make here today. We do not have basic information on the number of people. We can make this more complicated and dress it up in political language if Liberals would like, but all I want to know is how many people they are planning to bring into our country, so that when we go back to our constituents, we can at least say that we made an informed decision. I would encourage my hon. colleague from the Bloc to ask that very same question and make it the number one priority in this conversation. How many people are coming here, and how many hospital beds, jobs and houses will not go to Canadians because of this legislation?

Madam Speaker, we have yet another example of a member of Parliament saying that he is concerned about information and studying the legislation and that he really wants to make an informed decision and elevate the discourse. However, when I ask basic questions like how many people would be brought into our country, that is crossing a line somehow. This is basic stuff. People deserve to know, with the scarce resources our country has, how many people the Liberal government is going to bring in to further divide what is a finite pie of resources and opportunity. This is a basic element of managing a country, an economy and a health care system. The Liberals want to make it more complicated than that, but it is very simple.

With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada in the 2024-25 fiscal year: (a) how much was spent administering the student visa program, in total and broken down by type of expense; (b) how many employees were assigned to the program (i) in total, (ii) for processing applications, (iii) for ensuring the compliance of those already granted a visa; (c) how many student visas were active; and (d) how many student visas were revoked, broken down by reason of revocation?

With regard to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program during the 2024-25 fiscal year: (a) how much was spent administering the program, in total and broken down by type of expense; (b) how many employees were assigned to the program, in total and broken down by type of assignment (processing applications, compliance, etc.); and (c) how much did the government spend promoting or advertising the program abroad, in total and broken down by country?

With regard to grants and contributions provided by Heritage Canada during the 2024-25 fiscal year: (a) what was the total (i) number, (ii) value, of grants and contributions; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by federal riding and by census metropolitan area; (c) what was the total (i) number, (ii) value, of grants and contributions provided to entities outside of Canada; and (d) what is the breakdown of (c) by country?

With regard to the government’s approach to dealing with labour shortages: (a) how much was spent in the last fiscal year, by the government, in relation to retraining Canadian workers in industries with labour shortages, in total and broken down by industry; and (b) what specific incentives, if any, are currently in place to encourage businesses in industries with labour shortages to retrain and hire Canadian workers to fill these positions?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have spent over $300 million on a housing program, claiming they would build 4,000 units. In seven years, they have built 309. To put it bluntly, that is not close at all. They have missed the mark by 93%. How can the Prime Minister continue to have the minister responsible for this failure in his cabinet? How could he promote that failed minister to be our current Minister of Justice?

With regard to government statistics on Canada's incarcerated or prison population, since 2016: (a) as of the start of each year, how many individuals were incarcerated in Canadian prisons or correctional facilities, in total and broken down by type of correctional facility; (b) currently, how many individuals are incarcerated in Canadian prisons or correctional facilities, in total and broken down by type of correctional facility; and (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by violent and non-violent offenders?

With regard to government statistics on church burnings in Canada, broken down by year since 2016: (a) how many churches have burned down that the government is aware of, in total and broken down by province or territory; and (b) does the government have any specific plan to prevent future church burning-related arson attacks, and, if so, what are the details, including the date when the plan will be implemented?

Mr. Speaker, I often hear from people who are retired union members, many of whom worked at places like GM in my local area, who supported the NDP their entire lives. Now they see what the party has become, and they have completely given up on it because they know we are the only ones fighting for any kind of transparency and accountability with the Liberal government. The NDP sold them out for Maseratis and has decided to put the Liberal Party and the Prime Minister above the people who have supported it for a long time. It is something I hear all the time. People want fighters. They want people who will come to Ottawa to fight for them, and that is what is missing from every party in the House except the Conservative Party.