The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15

Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act

An Act respecting certain affordability measures for Canadians and another measure

Sponsor

Status

In committee (House), as of June 12, 2025

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-4.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

Part 1 amends the Income Tax Act to reduce the marginal personal income tax rate on the lowest tax bracket to 14.5% for the 2025 taxation year and to 14% for the 2026 and subsequent taxation years.
Part 2 amends the Excise Tax Act and other related Regulations to implement a temporary GST new housing rebate for first-time home buyers.
Part 3 repeals Part 1 of the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act and the Fuel Charge Regulations .
Part 4 amends the Canada Elections Act to make changes to the requirements relating to political parties’ policies for the protection of personal information.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-4s:

C-4 (2021) Law An Act to amend the Criminal Code (conversion therapy)
C-4 (2020) Law COVID-19 Response Measures Act
C-4 (2020) Law Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act
C-4 (2016) Law An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code, the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, the Public Service Labour Relations Act and the Income Tax Act

Votes

June 12, 2025 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-4, An Act respecting certain affordability measures for Canadians and another measure

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary PolicyBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2025 / 4:45 p.m.


See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to the Conservatives' 100-day plan. This is something Pierre Poilievre talked about in the last election. Nowhere did he give any sort of commitment to a budget. Many people watching this debate might detect a bit of hypocrisy. Pierre Poilievre is now saying that we should have a budget, when he himself was not prepared to have it brought in within the first 100 days.

What we have is a Prime Minister who has been very proactive on the issue of affordability, and that is demonstrated in Bill C-4. Will the member support Bill C-4 and recommend to her caucus that we pass it before the end of June so Canadians will get that tax break come July 1?

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary PolicyBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2025 / 3:50 p.m.


See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the issue of affordability was raised a great deal during the election and even prior to the election. We have a new Prime Minister and a new government, and I believe the Prime Minister has been very clear on that particular issue. That is one of the reasons we have Bill C-4, which would provide tax relief in different ways. Twenty-two million Canadians would benefit by it, such as first-time homebuyers from the building of new homes. It would also put into law dealing with the consumer carbon tax, getting rid of it. It would make life more affordable for Canadians.

I am wondering if the member can be very clear in indicating not only that he supports this piece of legislation, but that he would like to see it pass before the House rises.

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary PolicyBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2025 / 1:10 p.m.


See context

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for Spadina—Harbourfront on her first remarks in this House of Commons. We share one thing in common: We are both former parliamentary interns. I welcome her to the House of Commons. I would encourage her to use her voice in this chamber. The Liberal Party has a tradition of allowing the member for Winnipeg North to disproportionately take up all the time. Therefore, I encourage her to stand so that we hear less from the member for Winnipeg North.

So far, the government has tabled Bill C-2, Bill C-3, Bill C-4 and Bill C-5. Today we heard from the government that it is going to spend billions upon billions of dollars more on defence. We are also facing the reality that the Liberal budget misallocated over $20 billion in its fiscal projections on what the government would be collecting on tariffs.

Amidst all the uncertainty and the major defence spending commitments, why has the government not committed to tabling a budget this spring, in this session, to give Canadians clarity?

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary PolicyBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2025 / 12:15 p.m.


See context

Bloc

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Mr. Speaker, since this is the first time I am speaking in this new Parliament, I will take the opportunity to say a few thank yous. I have had the privilege and honour of representing the people of Laurentides—Labelle since 2019. This is my third term.

First, I want to thank the 23,615 people who chose the Bloc Québécois. To all the others, as I said during the election campaign, I want them to know that I am there for and with them. I also want to thank my campaign team. I will take the time to mention them by name because their contribution was so valuable. They gave a great deal of their time. I want to thank Maryse, Samuel, Annie‑Claude, Annie, François, Michel and Lévis. I seriously would not be here without them. I covered 11,000 kilometres in 39 municipalities. Laurentides—Labelle is a very large but very beautiful riding. I want to thank all these volunteers.

All of this already makes me feel very constructive. I am pleased to rise today to speak to the motion put forward by the Conservatives on their opposition day. I am going to break down the motion. I will begin by quickly explaining the essence of this motion. Then I will outline why the Bloc Québécois supports it.

Obviously, this motion raises important questions about accountability and governance. I will also provide details. My colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé has already set the stage, so I will try not to be too repetitive.

First of all, it is true that families will pay more for their food. In fact, this has already been the case for some time. It is perfectly reasonable to be concerned about this issue, given that families' grocery bills are expected to increase by $800 a year. I think that all parliamentarians have noticed the increase in the price of groceries. In addition, there has been a marked increase in demand at all food banks.

I want to bring my colleagues' attention to a particular point in the motion, the one that states that the House should call on the government to present a budget before the summer. Summer starts on June 21, although it could also happen after that date. This budget is supposed to reverse Liberal inflationary policies so Canadians can afford to put food on the table.

I have reread the motion several times. The first part is essential. It calls on the government to present a budget.

I worked in community organizations for over two decades, and I am also an entrepreneur. Spending money without first identifying our revenue sources is simply not an option. Come on. That part caught my attention, and I wondered whether no budget was being presented because there was not enough time or because this new role came as a surprise. However, the Prime Minister is supposedly a world-renowned expert. Parliamentarians thought they were coming back to the House quickly so that the government could present an economic statement or a budget for them to vote on, but that is not the case.

The government was trying to make itself look good. Parliamentarians returned quickly. However, the government was not ready. What should be done in such a situation? We should take our time. This might take a week or two. In any case, as of March 14, the first day the finance minister took office, he knew that he needed to immediately start thinking about what he would propose. There are 343 members in this minority House, and the government is accountable to them. The government is trying to make itself look good. It is talking to the media and announcing goodies like tax cuts, help for first-time homebuyers and all sorts of other things.

Parliamentarians agree that anyone who has to put a budget together should have a full breakdown of their cash flow, so that they know exactly how much money is coming in and how much is going out.

What we have here is the other extreme. I say this to everyone in Laurentides—Labelle. When I tell them that we are talking about tax measures and that we will agree with this motion because there is indeed an inflationary crisis, constituents ask me what we are working with. I tell them that we are working with nothing.

When I talk to colleagues who are economists and accountants and to business people, they tell me that they do not understand why a self-respecting government is not even able to do the basics. I would have expected us to come back a month later than we did and sit until the end of July so that we would be ready to start again. As my colleague said earlier, the committees are not even sitting and cannot conduct any studies. I am lost for words. I just do not get it.

Speaking of committees, I will be taking on new responsibilities in that area. I will be working on tourism and veterans' affairs. I will also be working on government operations as a member of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. This committee is responsible for analyzing costs. It is fortuitous that we have not started yet. Government spending on equipment purchases is rising from $3.7 billion to $10.8 billion, an increase of 190%. I find that very disconcerting. Governing with billions of dollars is nothing new. I therefore agree with my Conservative colleagues that a budget needs be presented, and quickly. That is the first thing I wanted to say.

Furthermore, it has been six months since the House last sat. As I said, as of March 14, we expected to have something tangible to work on when we returned to the House. Instead, we are being presented with a bill called Bill C‑4, which contains tax measures. However, we do not know how we can work on spending and approve it. The government is putting the screws on us, saying that surely we cannot oppose these measures, since they are intended to help people. To me, that is unacceptable.

I want to conclude by saying that Bloc Québécois members are really here to work for our people. We are not here to poll higher, get re-elected and keep our voters in line as of day one in office. We have already taken action. My colleague talked about this earlier. The Institut de recherche en économie contemporaine, or IREC, conducted a study. Everyone says that groceries are expensive, but we all know why. It is because of climate change.

Here is an example. I did some gardening this weekend. I can make plans based on the weather. If there is torrential rain, I will protect the garden. If there is a chance of frost in July, I will protect it. If the weather is too dry, I will water it. How well equipped are our producers to adapt to climate change? Basically, life is about supply and demand. If the supply is lacking, obviously things will cost more. The Conservatives care a lot about public safety, but I would suggest that food security is part of that as well, so let us tackle the root of the problem. We know that abolishing the carbon tax has done nothing to bring down the cost of groceries.

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary PolicyBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2025 / 11:55 a.m.


See context

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech in the House. I have not seen him often in the past, so I assume that he is a newly elected member.

The member told us that he wants to get moving and that he is part of a government that is taking action. I find that interesting to hear. It is basically true, and we can see that. The government has introduced a few bills so far. These are fairly substantial bills. What is more, the Liberals would like to see these bills passed by July 1. They have tabled a notice of ways and means, Bill C‑4 and Bill C‑5, among other things. The Liberals are certainly proactive when it comes to asking the House for things.

The problem is that the committees are not even sitting. This means that we cannot even analyze the bills that the Liberals want us to pass by July 1. On top of that, they are asking us for new spending. They are asking us for a lot of things, but there is no budget. Does the member opposite not feel that the Liberals are being somewhat inconsistent? Their actions do not seem to match their words.

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary PolicyBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

June 9th, 2025 / 11:30 a.m.


See context

Bloc

Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech.

Throughout the election campaign, the Prime Minister talked about Donald Trump and the disaster that was coming. Now the Liberals are putting forward measures without presenting a budget, which makes no sense. We completely agree on that. It is even more troubling because the fiscal framework the Liberals presented during the election campaign was not realistic. They were supposed to implement it with the $20 billion that they were going to recover through retaliatory tariffs, but we have since learned that there will be no retaliatory measures.

In Bill C-4, the Liberals have included a tax cut and a GST exemption that will amount to roughly $30 billion. Where are they going to get that money? Are they going to slash health transfers?

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.