Sitting 51 — November 5, 2025

The sitting was dominated by debate on the Liberal government’s budget, tabled the previous day, with the central political argument revolving around the size of the deficit, the impact of industrial carbon pricing on food and housing costs, and whether the budget represented a generational investment or reckless spending.

The budget, presented as the Financial Statement of the Minister of Finance, proposes $81 billion in new defence spending over five years, a middle-class tax cut, a permanent national school food program, and a new Build Communities Strong fund for infrastructure. The Conservatives, led by Pierre Poilievre, opposed the budget outright, calling it the most expensive in Canadian history outside of COVID, with a $78.3-billion deficit that doubles the previous government’s and adds $10 million to the national debt every hour. They argued the budget would drive up food and housing costs by strengthening industrial carbon pricing, which they said acts as a hidden tax on fertilizer, farm equipment, and construction materials. The Bloc Québécois, through Yves-François Blanchet, moved a subamendment to reject the budget, citing failures to raise health transfers to 6%, end age discrimination in Old Age Security for those 65–74, repay $814 million to Quebec for the end of consumer carbon pricing, and propose effective climate measures. The NDP and Green Party expressed disappointment with the budget’s lack of climate ambition, with Elizabeth May asking whether the government would be flexible before the final vote. The government defended the budget as a historic investment in Canadian sovereignty, economic growth, and affordability, noting Canada’s AAA credit rating and lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7.

Private Members’ Business saw second reading debate on Bill C-237, which would amend the Fisheries Act to harmonize recreational groundfish fishing seasons across Atlantic Canada, allowing Newfoundland and Labrador residents to fish seven days a week with a five-fish daily limit, matching rules elsewhere. The bill’s sponsor, Jonathan Rowe (CPC), argued it would end unfair restrictions and improve food security and safety by eliminating pressure to fish only on weekends. The Bloc Québécois indicated support for sending the bill to committee, while Liberal members, including Philip Earle (Labrador), opposed it, warning that species-based management would threaten commercial fisheries by disrupting bycatch quotas and that the bill would impose new fees on recreational fishers. The government announced it would launch its own consultations on the Newfoundland and Labrador food fishery.

Oral Questions focused overwhelmingly on the budget and carbon pricing. The Conservatives repeatedly accused the Prime Minister of breaking his promise to spend less, pointing to the $78.3-billion deficit and rising interest costs on the national debt, which they said now exceed health transfers. They argued that the industrial carbon tax, which remains in place after the consumer carbon tax was removed, drives up the cost of food, housing, and everything else, citing food price expert Sylvain Charlebois. The government responded that the industrial carbon tax has approximately zero impact on food prices, citing the Canadian Climate Institute, and that the budget invests in affordability through a middle-class tax cut, housing, and child care. On justice, the Conservatives pressed the government to invoke the notwithstanding clause after a Supreme Court ruling struck down a mandatory one-year sentence for possession of child sexual abuse material; the government said it would bring forward legislative solutions within the Constitution.