All sittings← 2026-10-202026-10-22 →
Wednesday, October 21, 2026 · sitting No. 152
House opens second reading debate on safe social media act
The House spent the largest share of its sitting on second reading of Bill C-34, the safe social media act. Marc Miller moved the bill and said the measure would protect young Canadians from online harm through a new Digital Safety Commission. The debate continued into the evening without a vote.
Pierre Poilievre pressed the government in Question Period over rising food bank use. He said visits reached 2.35 million in a month and asked what verdict the Prime Minister would accept on grocery prices. Joël Lightbound and Evan Solomon replied that the government had expanded the Canada child benefit, dental care and school food programs.
Jacob Mantle questioned housing starts under the government target of 500,000 homes a year. Gregor Robertson said Build Canada Homes had 19,000 units under way and that further support from the opposition would speed delivery.
Decided that day
- Bill S-210 passed third reading to create Ukrainian Heritage Month
From the Hansard record of the sitting. Full Hansard
Question Period – October 21, 2026. Video from CPAC. Watch on YouTube
Who held the floor · 2026-10-21
AI-rated The sitting score and the rating of each answer come from a language model reading Hansard. How the AI rates this
Provisional score. Question Period for this sitting has not been rated yet, so the score rests only on what was decided and how much time went to the business at hand. It will change when the exchanges are read.
Other moments
Food Security
Eric Lefebvre said food banks in Quebec handle more than 3.2 million requests a month and that 23 per cent of recipients are employed.
Read the exchangeGovernment Priorities
Christine Normandin said Bill C-39 removes environmental assessments for pipelines and nuclear projects and places the right to strike under government control.
Read the exchangePublic Services and Procurement
Pierre Poilievre said the government awarded a security contract to an American firm linked to ICE instead of the Commissionaires, the largest employer of veterans.
Read the exchangeLabour
Grant Jackson said the government is ending the rule that employers must first try to hire Canadians before turning to temporary foreign workers.
Read the exchangePublic Safety
Frank Caputo said full parole granted to Zakaria Amara and day parole granted to Christopher Roulston show the system needs reform.
Read the exchangeQuestion Period, exchange by exchange
AI-rated Each answer’s rating (answered, partly answered, deflected, answered something else) is a model’s reading of the exchange. How the AI rates this
- deflectedThe EconomyPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Joël Lightbound (Liberal). loaded question.Answer shifts to criticizing opposition votes instead of addressing food bank statistics or verdict on grocery prices.
At every opportunity, however, members of his party have voted against highly concrete measures that are helping the neediest Quebeckers and Canadians cope with the rising cost of living.
- deflectedThe EconomyPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Joël Lightbound (Liberal). loaded question.Answer avoids the crisis recognition and food bank numbers by listing benefits and attacking the member's record on semantics.
for 20 years, whenever the time has come to actually support people, he has not stepped up.
- misdirectedThe EconomyPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Evan Solomon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer opens with unrelated thanks for community work before pivoting to listing programs without addressing the food bank verdict.
before I answer, I want to thank the hon. member for the work he has done in his riding at CFB Wainwright.
- deflectedThe EconomyPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Evan Solomon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer begins to contrast talk versus action but cuts off without addressing the crisis recognition vote or food bank data.
there is a big difference between talking about something and doing something.
- deflectedThe EconomyPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Evan Solomon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer lists government actions but ignores the specific inflation, construction, and food bank failures raised, instead urging opposition support.
we took the GST off new homes, saving $250,000 for new homebuyers.
- misdirectedFinancePierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Evan Solomon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer pivots to job creation and growth stats instead of addressing the deficit increase or debt interest burden on families.
in the last 12 months, 217,000 jobs were created, with 156,000 in the private sector alone.
- deflectedGovernment PrioritiesChristine Normandin (Bloc) asked Sean Fraser (Liberal). loaded question.Answer defends the bill's purpose but does not engage with the authoritarian overreach or provincial rights concerns raised.
this bill is designed to attract investment throughout the country in order to create good-paying jobs across the country and strengthen Canada's economic growth for future generations.
- misdirectedGovernment PrioritiesChristine Normandin (Bloc) asked Julie Dabrusin (Liberal). loaded question.Answer questions the Bloc's consistency on emissions rather than addressing the bill's impacts on environment, labour, or reconciliation.
I thought the Bloc Québécois supported this project, but now it does not.
- deflectedLabourAndréanne Larouche (Bloc) asked Joël Lightbound (Liberal). loaded question.The answer pivots to attacking the opposition leader's comments on an unrelated project rather than addressing union concerns about the bill.
That is a very narrow-minded view that I find quite baffling.
- misdirectedPublic Services and ProcurementPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Peter Fragiskatos (Liberal). substantive question.The response attacks the Conservative record on veterans instead of explaining the procurement decision.
I would remind him of the Conservative record on veterans and the endless cuts we saw under Conservative leadership.
- deflectedPublic Services and ProcurementPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Jill McKnight (Liberal). substantive question.The answer cites a fair process but avoids addressing the broken buy-Canadian promise or veteran impact.
the CRA followed a fair and open procurement process for guard services.
- deflectedPublic Services and ProcurementPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Jill McKnight (Liberal). substantive question.The response reiterates a fair process and pivots to general veteran supports without addressing the specific contract choice.
this was a contract decision made by the CRA.
- partly answeredThe EconomyJohn Barlow (Conservative) asked Peter Fragiskatos (Liberal). substantive question.The answer acknowledges hardship and lists programs but does not address whether affordability is the best in a decade or the food-bank reality.
there certainly is hardship in Canada.
- deflectedThe EconomyJohn Barlow (Conservative) asked Peter Fragiskatos (Liberal). substantive question.The response shifts to listing recommendations and attacking partisanship instead of addressing tax elimination or the affordability crisis.
I invite the Conservatives to put aside partisanship in the same way that Premier Ford has
- deflectedThe EconomyRhonda Kirkland (Conservative) asked Leslie Church (Liberal). substantive question.The answer thanks a food bank and lists programs the opposition voted against but does not admit the scale of the crisis.
What do these measures have in common? The opposition voted against them.
- misdirectedThe EconomyRhonda Kirkland (Conservative) asked Leslie Church (Liberal). substantive question.The response attacks the opposition for rhetoric and voting records instead of addressing admission of the crisis or the plan to fix it.
I think the problem Canadians have is that they see through the rhetoric on the other side of the House
- partly answeredCanadian Identity and CultureMartin Champoux (Bloc) asked Marc Miller (Liberal). substantive question.The answer vaguely promises imminent action on the $600 million but provides no timeline or details on levies.
- misdirectedCanadian Identity and CultureMartin Champoux (Bloc) asked Marc Miller (Liberal). loaded question.The answer attacks the Bloc's voting record and mentions unrelated funding instead of addressing the levies question.
it is unfortunate that my colleague is accusing me of partisanship when I funded the poutine festival in his riding.
- misdirectedThe EconomySandra Cobena (Conservative) asked Anna Gainey (Liberal). substantive question.The answer deflects by questioning Conservative votes on unrelated programs rather than addressing food bank failures.
I would also like to ask why members opposite can stand in the House on this issue without answering the question as to why they vote against school food.
- deflectedThe EconomySandra Cobena (Conservative) asked Anna Gainey (Liberal). substantive question.The answer promotes school food programs and criticizes opposition votes instead of explaining why work is insufficient for food banks.
Again, why do the members opposite vote against things such as breakfast for children in elementary schools, dental care and other things that help families make ends meet?
- deflectedThe EconomyBob Zimmer (Conservative) asked Joanne Thompson (Liberal). substantive question.The answer lists government actions and accuses the opposition of politics without admitting to food bank increases.
The other side of the House is just playing politics today.
- misdirectedThe EconomyJoël Godin (Conservative) asked Joël Lightbound (Liberal). substantive question.The answer criticizes the member's party for voting against programs instead of addressing the food insecurity crisis or Conservative plan.
I find this line of questioning absolutely fascinating coming from a member and a party that consistently, at every opportunity, vote against measures that are actually helping their constituents.
- misdirectedThe EconomyJoël Godin (Conservative) asked Joël Lightbound (Liberal). substantive question.The answer defends programs by citing numbers of beneficiaries and attacks the member's votes rather than considering tax changes on diesel.
He should also explain it to the 23,855 people in his riding who now have access to dental care through the Canadian dental care plan, a program he voted against.
- partly answeredHousingJacob Mantle (Conservative) asked Gregor Robertson (Liberal). substantive question.The answer addresses housing efforts with specific numbers but does not confirm or abandon the 500,000 homes target.
We have over 19,000 homes now under way with Build Canada Homes, affordable non-market homes that are scaling up.
- deflectedHousingJacob Mantle (Conservative) asked Gregor Robertson (Liberal). loaded question.Answer attacks the asker and pivots to opposition voting record instead of addressing the Dominican Republic spending claim.
clearly the member opposite is not paying attention.
- deflectedHousingDan Muys (Conservative) asked Gregor Robertson (Liberal). substantive question.Answer discusses general housing facts and Liberal actions but ignores the September starts drop and failure admission request.
there are some basic facts around the housing market that we are challenged with as a country right now
- deflectedHousingGabriel Hardy (Conservative) asked Caroline Desrochers (Liberal). substantive question.Answer lists programs and attacks Conservatives rather than acknowledging whether the ownership plan is failing.
Where are the Conservatives? Obviously, they are nowhere to be seen.
- deflectedHousingGabriel Hardy (Conservative) asked Caroline Desrochers (Liberal). substantive question.Answer defends regional efforts and ends by attacking Conservative votes instead of addressing program failures in regions.
The Conservatives just vote against everything we do.
- deflectedLabourGrant Jackson (Conservative) asked Leslie Church (Liberal). loaded question.Answer emphasizes favoring Canadian workers but sidesteps the specific policy change removing the hire-Canadians-first proof requirement.
we will always favour Canadian labour and Canadian workers.
- deflectedLabourGrant Jackson (Conservative) asked Lena Metlege Diab (Liberal). loaded question.Answer cites external praise and red-tape reduction without addressing the scrapped safeguard for hiring Canadians first.
We welcome these changes to Express Entry and applaud the government and Minister Diab's endeavour to reduce red tape
- misdirectedLabourMichelle Rempel Garner (Conservative) asked Lena Metlege Diab (Liberal). substantive question.Answer attacks the member personally for misleading Canadians instead of responding to the BioWare jobs and policy impact question.
She is continually misleading Canadians.
- deflectedImmigrationMichelle Rempel Garner (Conservative) asked Leslie Church (Liberal). loaded question.Answer corrects on TFW numbers and frames changes positively but avoids defending the policy as good for Canadian workers.
it must be a rough day on opposition benches when the Conservatives take aim at Canada's immigration system and TFWs in ways that they know are incorrect.
- deflectedPublic SafetyFrank Caputo (Conservative) asked Gary Anandasangaree (Liberal). loaded question.The answer stresses parole board independence without addressing calls for government reform.
The parole system works independently of government.
- misdirectedPublic SafetyFrank Caputo (Conservative) asked Gary Anandasangaree (Liberal). substantive question.The answer attacks the opposition's voting record instead of addressing parole reform.
- deflectedPublic SafetyKathy Borrelli (Conservative) asked Gary Anandasangaree (Liberal). substantive question.The answer reiterates parole board independence without explaining the unescorted absence policy.
The decision of the Parole Board is independent.
- deflectedAir TransportationMichael Kram (Conservative) asked Mike Kelloway (Liberal). loaded question.The answer discusses modernization and regional airports but avoids the question on increased costs.
We are looking at modernizing airports.
- deflectedJusticeLeah Gazan (NDP) asked Mike Kelloway (Liberal). loaded question.The answer promotes general goals without addressing the bill's alleged impacts on rights.
it is not about changing standards.