← All debates · Search this sitting
45-1 · 195 speeches · 37,316 words · most frequent word: “victims”
Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 1·International Trade·Natural ResourcesThe sitting was dominated by debate on the Budget 2025 Implementation Act, Bill C-15, with the central political argument turning on whether the government’s $78-billion deficit constituted a necessary generational investment or reckless fiscal mismanagement. Oral Questions focused heavily on the Prime Minister’s foreign travel, the state of trade negotiations with the United States, and the forestry sector’s ongoing crisis.
The Budget 2025 Implementation Act, Bill C-15, was debated for a combined 71 speeches. The government argued the bill makes generational investments in housing, defence, health infrastructure, and critical minerals, and that borrowing for capital projects is sound fiscal management. The Liberals highlighted a $70-billion investment commitment from the United Arab Emirates and a $1-billion critical minerals deal, as well as tax cuts for middle-income earners and the permanent national school food program. The Conservatives countered that the deficit had doubled the previous year’s record, that the Parliamentary Budget Officer found only a 7.5% chance of meeting the government’s own fiscal anchors, and that the definition of “capital investment” was overly expansive. They accused the government of accounting trickery and of mortgaging the future of young Canadians. The Bloc Québécois criticized the budget for ignoring seasonal workers’ EI reform and for failing to support the forestry industry, while also objecting to what it called creative accounting. The NDP raised concerns about cuts to indigenous programs such as the Inuit child first initiative and Jordan’s principle. No amendments were debated; the bill remained at second reading.
Oral Questions were dominated by two recurring themes: the Prime Minister’s international travel and the forestry industry’s collapse. Conservatives repeatedly argued that every foreign trip resulted in higher tariffs on Canadian goods, citing increased duties on canola, peas, steel, aluminum, and softwood lumber, and demanded the Prime Minister stay home. The government replied that the Prime Minister had secured a $70-billion investment from the UAE and a $1-billion critical minerals deal, and that diversifying trade beyond the United States was essential. On forestry, Bloc and Conservative members pressed for wage subsidies and advances on countervailing duties after the Arbec mill in Port-Cartier laid off 100 workers. The government pointed to existing programs worth $700 million in liquidity, $500 million for transformation, and $50 million for wages, and promised further measures. Other questions covered the carbon tax’s impact on food prices, the PBO’s warning on fiscal anchors, and the tanker ban on Canada’s west coast.
During Routine Proceedings, the government tabled responses to nine petitions. By unanimous consent, the House agreed to hold a take-note debate on the softwood lumber industry on November 25, 2025, with extended speaking time. Several petitions were presented, including calls for an alternative location for a supportive housing project in Abbotsford, federal action on the invasive water soldier plant in Lake Simcoe, reinstatement of the Inuit child first food voucher program, humanitarian aid for Gaza, Royal Canadian Navy medical assistance for hurricane-hit Jamaica, a service-dog framework for veterans with PTSD, and more international flights from Winnipeg. Fourteen questions were passed as orders for return. No procedural votes or divisions were recorded.
| Member | Party | Speeches | Words |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dane Lloyd | Conservative | 6 | 3,192 |
| Yasir Naqvi | Liberal | 9 | 2,240 |
| Jacob Mantle | Conservative | 8 | 2,167 |
| Kevin Lamoureux | Liberal | 12 | 2,010 |
| Ned Kuruc |
In Private Members’ Business, the House began second reading of Bill C-236, the Addressing the Continuing Victimization of Homicide Victims’ Families Act, introduced by Dane Lloyd (CPC). The bill would allow judges to treat an offender’s refusal to disclose the location of a victim’s remains as an aggravating factor at sentencing and would give the Parole Board discretion to deny parole to offenders who withhold that information. Lloyd named the bill after Lyle and Marie McCann, whose remains have never been found. The Bloc Québécois and most Conservatives spoke in support, arguing it would provide closure for families. The parliamentary secretary to the government House leader expressed reservations about charter compliance and noted that judges already have discretion to consider such factors, but did not announce a formal government position. The debate was adjourned.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official Hansard.
| 8 |
| 1,964 |
| Michael Guglielmin | Conservative | 5 | 1,924 |
| Steeve Lavoie | Liberal | 5 | 1,918 |
| Marilène Gill | Bloc | 5 | 1,850 |
| Pat Kelly | Conservative | 4 | 1,825 |
| Brendan Hanley | Liberal | 6 | 1,800 |