Pierre Poilievre

Pierre Poilievre says Liberals' 'catch-and-release' approach endangers public safety and that only Conservatives will restore a justice system that keeps families safe by keeping criminals behind bars, signaling support for tougher bail and detention rather than release.

Pierre Poilievre publicly supported Conservative Bill C-225, endorsing tougher bail measures: stricter bail rules for those with prior domestic violence convictions and empowering courts to hold accused individuals up to seven days for risk assessments to better protect intimate partner violence victims.

Pierre Poilievre demanded the federal government overrule the Supreme Court’s decision by invoking the notwithstanding clause, signaling support for preserving mandatory one-year minimum prison sentences for accessing or possessing child sexual abuse material.

Poilievre opposes the Supreme Court ruling that struck down mandatory minimums for child pornography; he says he would invoke the notwithstanding clause to overturn it and would introduce mandatory prison sentences for possession to impose longer penalties.

He says RCMP leadership was "frankly just despicable" and "covering up" for Justin Trudeau, asserting the RCMP "failed to do its job" and that some Liberal-era scandals should have resulted in criminal charges and punishment.

Poilievre strongly criticizes RCMP leadership for failing to enforce laws against the Liberal government, accusing the force of covering up misconduct and targeting former RCMP commissioner Brenda Lucki for scandals, deception, and political interference benefiting the Liberals.

Poilievre says political leaders and ministers who face real threats, as assessed by the RCMP, should receive protection to mitigate political violence; he emphasizes preserving free debate and refusing to let violent actors silence opposing viewpoints.

Poilievre proposes amending the Criminal Code to presume that use of force against someone who illegally enters a home and poses a threat to occupants is reasonable, thereby strengthening legal protections for homeowners who defend their homes.

Support applying lawful interception powers to investigate foreign interference offences

Support strengthening sabotage laws to protect essential infrastructure from harmful acts

Support increasing and clarifying CSIS data collection and exploitation authorities for intelligence work

Oppose these public safety and policing appropriations

Oppose allocating these funds to the Administrative Tribunals Support Service, signaling objection to this tribunal funding

Voting Nay means opposing the additional funding for court administrative program expenditures, potentially slowing efforts to reduce backlogs or maintain services.

Support creation of new independent civilian oversight body for police and border officers

Support updating evidentiary rules to allow Commission proceedings to access necessary evidence

Voting Yea means supporting a temporary prohibition on MAiD for people whose sole underlying condition is a mental illness, endorsing a precautionary approach and a parliamentary review process before potentially extending eligibility.

Voting Yea means supporting a narrowly tailored exception that balances consumer repair needs with security by limiting circumvention to sole-purpose maintenance and excluding infringing acts, thereby enabling legitimate repair without wholesale removal of protections.

Voting Yea means supporting stronger criminal and administrative penalties and enforcement authority to ensure compliance with beneficial ownership rules and deter concealment of ownership tied to criminal activity.

Oppose the proposed policing and public safety funding in this appropriation Act.

Voting Yea means supporting a targeted change to the Criminal Code that creates a legal pathway for certain activities that might otherwise be treated as terrorist‑financing offences, with ministerial oversight and safeguards.

Oppose adding importation requirements for ammunition and parts

Oppose expanding public officer status to federal security employees

Oppose mandatory transfer/disposal pending court referral

Oppose broadening interception powers to include these offences

Oppose raising maximum sentences for weapons offences

Oppose new offences targeting computer data related to firearms

Oppose expanding ability to obtain emergency firearm prohibition orders

Oppose deeming additional firearms as prohibited devices

Oppose limiting licence eligibility based on protection orders/domestic violence convictions

Oppose creating a specific offence for magazine modification

Oppose the chosen commencement timing or coordination

Voting Nay means opposing diversionary referrals to addiction services via criminal justice actors and favoring continued criminal processing.

Voting Nay means opposing reductions in mandatory penalties and preferring to retain stricter, legislated minimum punishments intended to deter and punish certain offences.

Voting Nay means opposing the specific textual amendments to the Criminal Code, whether due to concerns about scope, legal effects, or policy direction.

Voting Nay means opposing broader use of conditional sentences and preferring custodial sentences for the offences affected.

Voting Nay means opposing diversion/decriminalization measures and supporting continued criminal enforcement for possession as a deterrent or public safety tool.

Voting Nay means opposing formal adoption of harm-reduction principles in drug policy, preferring enforcement-focused approaches.

Voting Yea means supporting a legal change to require judges to consider electronic monitoring as a release condition in intimate-partner violence cases, prioritizing victim safety in bail decisions and expanding explicit factors for pre-trial release.

Voting Yea means supporting mandatory judicial continuing education on intimate-partner violence, coercive control, sexual assault law, and related social context to improve judicial responses and fairness in such cases.

Poilievre advocates eliminating the federal fuel excise tax, the GST on fuel and the clean fuel charge until year-end, proposing temporary tax cuts he says would lower pump prices by 25 cents per litre and save families about $1,200, and he presented a House motion to that effect.

Poilievre called for permanently eliminating the industrial carbon tax and the clean fuel standard, and urged the federal government to suspend the fuel excise and GST on gasoline and diesel — delivering this demand in a letter to Prime Minister Carney.

Poilievre is campaigning on affordability, proposing to cut the federal gas tax to zero to ease pressure on Canadians facing high fuel prices, and framing Canada as self-reliant and strong in messaging tied to lowering costs for households.

Pierre Poilievre opposes federal spending on the proposed Toronto–Quebec City high-speed rail project, characterizing the initiative as a 'boondoggle' and a 'waste of money,' indicating he believes the project should not be funded.

Poilievre urges a temporary pause of federal fuel taxes (GST and excise) for the rest of the year to lower gas and diesel prices by about 25¢/L, and says the $5.25B cost should be covered by cutting what he calls wasteful spending.

Pierre Poilievre calls for federal gas taxes to be scrapped for the rest of the year and said his plan would eliminate the fuel excise tax, the GST on fuel and the clean fuel charge (the carbon-pricing charge on fuel) to lower prices.

Pierre Poilievre blames the prime minister’s 'anti-energy policies' for higher pump prices and demands the removal of 'that tax' so Canadians can get relief at the pumps, calling on the government to repeal the tax he says raises fuel costs.

Poilievre opposes U.S. tariffs on Canadian goods and calls for removing them to achieve tariff-free trade. He argues doing so protects Canadian auto, steel, aluminum and lumber workers, reduces costs for Americans, and relies on cultivating American goodwill.

Poilievre says the loss of 84,000 jobs is 'devastating' and attributes it, in part, to 'Mark Carney's Liberal failures' and 'job-killing Liberal policies,' blaming the government for harming employment levels.

Pierre Poilievre says Canada faces more barriers to interprovincial trade than international trade and criticizes a federal law that prevents Canada Post from delivering Canadian alcohol to consumers in six provinces, blaming the prime minister for not changing it.

Poilievre says the Liberals are 'trying to muzzle the parliamentary budget office' by not appointing Jason Jacques; he wrote to the prime minister urging Jacques be made permanent and said Conservatives will review the new nominee's record before voting.

Poilievre says the Conservatives will prioritize affordability and the cost of living, claiming people 'can’t afford to eat,' running candidates on a platform to make Canada affordable, and warning the cost of living will worsen if the Liberals gain a majority government.

Poilievre said he has “serious” reservations about the government's suggested parliamentary budget officer, urged that interim PBO Jason Jacques be appointed permanently, and warned the office “cannot provide oversight and transparency” until a new officer is named.

Poilievre states that Canada is facing a hunger crisis caused by rapidly rising food prices, noting 2.2 million people at food banks. He emphasizes that food prices have climbed to near-record rates and continue accelerating, highlighting the urgency of the problem.

Poilievre rejects labeling Canada’s response as an 'anti‑America' overreaction, says Canadians are rightfully upset by unjustified U.S. tariffs and presidential comments, and argues Canada should focus on adapting and strengthening domestic measures to increase its leverage in trade negotiations.

Poilievre says Canadians are 'legitimately upset' by 'unjustifiable tariffs' from the U.S.; he rejects an MP's minimization and urges focusing on practical adaptation rather than reacting to the president's words and deeds.

Poilievre called for exempting withholding taxes on lump-sum severance payments for laid-off GM workers, arguing taxing severances would deprive workers of “tens of thousands of dollars” and urging the government to “stop taking their money at the worst possible moment.”

Poilievre urges lower taxes, a smaller deficit and fiscal policies that make Canada 'affordable, safe and self-reliant.' He pressed the Prime Minister with specific suggestions to restore investment and expressed disappointment at the size of the deficit.

Poilievre says spending and policy priorities should fast-track modest measures that make life more affordable and safer, strengthen the economy, and promote self-reliance. He seeks urgent collaboration with the prime minister to implement practical, fast‑track results.

Voting Yea means supporting increased federal spending/transfers to provide targeted cost-of-living relief through larger and advance GSTC payments, accepting the fiscal cost to deliver near-term support.

Pierre Poilievre advocates actively opposing U.S. tariffs and pursuing a tariff-free deal with American counterparts, offering Conservative assistance to the prime minister to fast-track practical solutions and cooperation to resolve trade disputes.

Pierre Poilievre says rising cost of living is the result of Liberal policies; he blames the Liberals for Canadians’ financial struggles and pledged that, under his leadership, the Conservative Party will offer solutions to reduce living costs and restore hope for families.

Pierre Poilievre said the Conservative Party will allow the government’s GST top-up (the GST rebate/Groceries and Essential Benefit increase) to pass Parliament, indicating he will not oppose the one-time and staged GST rebate increases.

Poilievre urges Canadians to continue working with U.S. allies outside the Trump administration until the larger relationship is repaired, and says Conservatives 'stand ready to help' the Liberals in opposing and fighting U.S. tariffs.

Poilievre blames ten years of Liberal rule for the rising cost of living, specifically high grocery prices. He emphasized the issue at a rally, asserting that Liberal policies are responsible for making everyday necessities more expensive for Canadians.

Poilievre emphasizes affordability as the central Conservative priority, arguing Canadians 'cannot afford grocery prices' because of what he calls 'hidden Liberal taxes on food' under Prime Minister Mark Carney, and saying affordability 'unites all Conservatives.'

Poilievre condemns the prime minister's expensive private flight, calling it a waste of taxpayer money and a photo op, and argues government should prioritize Canadians' cost-of-living needs—criticizing lavish travel while people queue at food banks.

Support government spending package for 2026

Pierre Poilievre criticizes the prime minister for not taking the Canada–U.S. tariff dispute seriously, accusing him of abandoning an 'elbows up' approach, failing to produce results abroad, and leaving Canadian workers exposed to higher U.S. tariff rates.

Poilievre criticizes federal referral to the Major Projects Office and opposes further federal delays, urging Ottawa to 'get out of the way' by granting the necessary permit so the Sisson Mine can proceed, warning against more consideration instead of action.

Pierre Poilievre opposes the Liberal government's budget and fiscal policy and has declared that the Conservative Party will vote against the budget motion, stating his caucus intends to 'unanimously oppose' the motion.

Poilievre says his agenda is to fight for an affordable Canada, prioritizing policies to lower the cost of living so people who work hard can afford a home and food; he presents himself as the leader focused on affordability.

Poilievre says he will not pre-commit to supporting or opposing the federal budget until he reads it; he supports an affordable budget that reduces the cost of living, prefers a zero deficit but acknowledges current fiscal constraints and seeks collaboration.

Poilievre demands that the Liberals scrap the industrial carbon tax and keep the federal deficit below $42 billion as conditions for Conservative votes on the new government's budget, indicating opposition to supporting the budget unless those demands are met.

Pierre Poilievre demands the Liberals remove the industrial carbon tax (which he calls "a hidden tax on food"), enact income and capital gains tax cuts, and limit the federal deficit to $42 billion or less as conditions for Conservative support of the budget.

He pledged on the campaign trail to double federal funding for the Union Training and Innovation Program — from $25 million to $50 million annually — to boost union-based apprenticeship training for Red Seal trades and support job creation through skilled trades.

Pierre Poilievre sharply criticized the prime minister's pre-budget speech, calling it a 'buffet of broken promises' and denouncing it as a 'sacrifice speech' aimed at youth, saying Canadian youth 'have sacrificed enough' and opposing further budgetary sacrifices.

Pierre Poilievre, in a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney, called for an "affordable budget" that includes broad tax cuts and for the federal deficit to be kept under $42 billion.

Poilievre demands the federal government publicly release its contracts with Stellantis, hold the company accountable for taxpayer incentives, and confirm protections for Canadian auto workers — pursuing an emergency House debate and reconvening the Industry committee to defend jobs.

Pierre Poilievre criticizes the federal government's 'out-of-control' spending, warning it risks pushing finances over a 'cliff.' He asks when the prime minister will stop runaway spending, indicating he wants spending curtailed to avoid worsening deficits.

Poilievre criticizes the government's handling of U.S. trade disputes, demands an end to 'losing', and urges negotiating concrete tariff wins for Canada — lifting U.S. tariffs on softwood lumber, steel, aluminum and autos and removing discriminatory Buy American rules.

Pierre Poilievre criticizes the government's handling of U.S. trade disputes, accusing the prime minister of failing to secure promised trade wins with the United States, calling it 'a gigantic bait-and-switch' and demanding, 'Where is the win?'

Poilievre accuses the government of "running massive deficits," criticizing its fiscal management and urging accountability; he frames the upcoming budget as fiscally irresponsible and demands the prime minister match grand promises with real change rather than continuing deficit spending.

Poilievre opposes creating a new federal housing bureaucracy and prioritizes incentives for homebuilding: speeding municipal permitting, cutting development fees by tying infrastructure funding to new homes, eliminating capital gains tax on reinvested homebuilding funds, and removing the 5% federal sales tax on homes under $1.3M.

Poilievre criticizes the government for failing to deliver permits for nation-building projects including energy infrastructure, saying the prime minister merely set up an office and presented pre-approved projects instead of actually approving or advancing new permits and construction.

Pierre Poilievre criticizes the government's tariff rollback as a 'capitulation', saying he would have gone directly to the U.S. president to demand removal of American tariffs in exchange for Canada removing its own, rather than conceding first.

Pierre Poilievre criticizes Prime Minister Mark Carney for failing to take a tough, 'elbows up' approach in trade disputes, implying he favors a firmer, more confrontational stance toward U.S. tariffs rather than repealing retaliatory measures.

Voting Yea means supporting legal protection for Canada's supply management import controls — preventing increases in tariff rate quotas or reductions in over‑quota tariffs for dairy, poultry and eggs to preserve domestic producer protection.

Voting Nay means opposing or withholding legal authority for the government to pay the specified supplementary amounts from the Consolidated Revenue Fund, which could prevent the government from making the listed expenditures or require alternative legislative action.

Voting Nay means rejecting the specific allocations and conditional authorities in the Supplementary Estimates (B), which would block those spending priorities and could disrupt departmental programs listed in the schedules.

Oppose government spending package for 2024

Support necessary consequential pension/appointment adjustments for new statutory officeholders

Oppose permitting Schedule 2 appropriations to be charged into the following fiscal year

Oppose this allocation, signaling objection to the Agency's 2024–25 funding

Oppose these CRA appropriations, objecting to the proposed revenue administration funding

Oppose these ESDC appropriations for unemployment and benefit programs

Oppose NRCan appropriations for energy infrastructure in this Act

Oppose these Transport Canada appropriations

Voting Nay means opposing the additional appropriations and authorities for agriculture operations and AgriStability administration, which could constrain program delivery.

Voting Nay means opposing the additional funding for heritage institutions and programs, which could reduce support for cultural preservation and related initiatives.

Support clarifying appropriation and funding mechanics for the Commission

Support transitional arrangements to transfer staff and functions smoothly

Oppose expanding occupational safety regulation to cover offshore renewables

Oppose government spending package for 2023

Voting Yea means supporting measures that strengthen unions' bargaining power and strike effectiveness by banning many forms of replacement labour, enforcing timely dispute resolution, and protecting reinstatement rights.

Voting Yea means supporting tougher enforcement and deterrence to protect workers' rights during strikes/lockouts, including high fines and administrative penalties to discourage use of replacement labour and ensure reinstatement.

Voting Nay opposes new or ongoing federal expenditures created by the Act, or prefers those functions to be funded differently or not legislated.

Voting Nay opposes privileging union participation or legislative support for union-centric definitions of decent work.

Voting Nay opposes legislating specific job-creation planning or believes job creation should be left to market forces or other policy instruments.

Voting Nay opposes statutorily mandating worker protection measures tied to climate policy or finds the measures excessive/ineffective.

Oppose government spending package for 2025

Voting Yea means supporting a temporary tax incentive to encourage construction of purpose-built rental housing by enhancing the GST rebate, with the aim of increasing rental supply and improving housing affordability.

Voting Yea means supporting a package of fiscal and regulatory actions intended to reduce household costs by stimulating rental supply and curbing anti-competitive/excessive pricing in essential markets.

Voting Yea means supporting stronger competition enforcement tools to prevent excessive and unfair selling prices, intended to protect consumers and address affordability pressures in essential markets (e.g., groceries).

Voting Yea means supporting mandatory beneficial ownership disclosure and public availability of key ownership information to strengthen detection and prevention of criminal misuse of corporations (e.g., money laundering, illicit finance), and enable co-operation with provincial registries.

Oppose CRA administrative appropriations included in this bill.

Oppose these appropriations to ACOA for operating and grant programs.

Oppose the ESDC funding allocations included in this appropriation Act.

Oppose providing these appropriations to the Administrative Tribunals Support Service.

Voting Nay means opposing the approval of these supplementary appropriations, which would block the government from legally drawing on the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the specified additional expenditures in 2023–24.

Voting Nay means opposing the targeted additional spending for CMHC reimbursements and related housing program expenditures included in this appropriation.

Voting Yea means supporting the federal prioritization of ongoing public spending to create and sustain a Canada-wide early learning and child care system and the use of federal funds to achieve accessibility, affordability and quality targets.

Voting Yea means supporting federal policy that prioritizes improving labor conditions, recruitment and retention in the early childhood education workforce as part of child care reform.

Oppose government spending package for 2023

Supports establishing complaint and referral mechanisms for workplace language rights

Voting Nay means opposing the increased funding for the energy regulator and the related charges to support energy infrastructure oversight.

Voting Yea means supporting a targeted income tax deduction that reduces taxable income for mobile trades workers required to pay their own travel costs, increasing their after-tax income and treating these travel costs as business-related deductions.

Voting Yea means supporting a policy that protects mobile workers financially by offsetting travel costs through the tax system, improving equity for tradespersons required to travel long distances for work.

Voting Yea means supporting measures to protect firefighters as workers — improved prevention, recognition of occupational cancers, standards review, screening and support for worker health.

Voting Yea means supporting federal leadership to improve availability of health services related to occupational cancers for firefighters — funding/coordination for research, screening guidance, data collection, training of providers, and public awareness measures.

Voting Yea means supporting the accompanying tax-law changes needed to integrate the Canada disability benefit into the federal tax and transfer framework.

Voting Yea means supporting the creation of a new federal spending program to reduce poverty among working-age persons with disabilities and backing federal prioritization of income supports and related administrative arrangements.

Oppose increased administrative and reporting burdens on trusts

Oppose a targeted one-time tax on large financial institutions

Oppose providing a new large tax credit for mineral exploration

Oppose recharacterizing short-term housing gains, favoring current capital gains treatment

Oppose creating a new tax-preferred savings account for home purchases

Oppose authorizing requisitions from the Consolidated Revenue Fund for this purpose

Oppose interest suspension due to fiscal cost or moral hazard concerns

Voting Nay means opposing the additional appropriations as presented, potentially signaling disagreement with the spending priorities, amounts, or the use of Supplementary Estimates to authorize these payments.

Voting Nay means opposing these cultural appropriations, possibly reflecting objections to funding levels, priorities, or the role of government in cultural support.

Voting Nay means opposing federal-mandated coordination aimed at job creation tied to the green transition in Prairie regions.

Voting Yea means supporting stronger legal protection for pension plan beneficiaries and retirees by prioritizing payment of unfunded pension liabilities and requiring transparency on plan solvency; it favors shifting some financial risks back onto employers/insolvency estates and increasing oversight of pension funding.

Voting Nay means opposing the associated tax-law amendments—potentially due to objections to the underlying benefits, concerns about fiscal or administrative implications, or disagreement with how the tax code is being adjusted.

Voting Nay means opposing this targeted federal relief—possibly due to concerns about fiscal cost, effectiveness, targeting accuracy, or preferring longer-term housing policy solutions.

Voting Yea means supporting a targeted cash-transfer-style response to ease immediate cost-of-living pressures for vulnerable households.

Voting Nay means opposing the specific amendments due to concerns about unintended impacts on production, administrative complexity, or potential negative effects on employers/platforms and content investment.

Oppose government spending package for 2022

Oppose funding the Administrative Tribunals Support Service or its recoverable CPP/EI-related expenditures for 2022–23

Voting Nay means opposing the legal authorization for these supplementary appropriations, which would block or delay the government's ability to spend the approved sums for 2022–23 as presented.

Oppose expanding the travel deduction; prefer existing limits or alternative support mechanisms

Oppose targeted refundable returns of fuel charge proceeds to farmers; prefer broad carbon pricing or other supports

Oppose creating a refundable ventilation tax credit and additional fiscal outlays for businesses

Oppose limiting recovery timeframes for CEBA amounts; prefer retaining longer recovery rights

Oppose capping EI weeks for seasonal workers; prefer preserving current benefit durations or more generous support

Oppose expanding criminal sanctions; prefer administrative penalties or alternative enforcement approaches

Voting Nay means opposing these specific allocations and the prioritization of funding to the listed agencies and purposes in the Supplementary Estimates (C).

Oppose extending the federal wage subsidy program beyond its prior expiry.

Oppose allowing extension of subsidy programs by regulation; prefer legislative changes only.

Oppose mandating this specific audit if seen as duplicative or politically motivated.

Oppose the budgetary amendment if it improperly authorizes spending or lacks oversight.

Oppose expanding leave entitlements that may impose additional burdens on federally regulated employers.

Oppose establishing a new federal lockdown benefit program.

Voting Nay means opposing this specific cultural appropriation — potentially arguing it is non-essential, should be provincially/privately funded, or should be reprioritized.

Poilievre says the Liberal government has failed to effectively negotiate CUSMA-related issues with the U.S., accusing Prime Minister Mark Carney of not holding talks for months, failing to secure wins, and 'losing, losing, losing' on tariffs and trade.

Poilievre demands the prime minister secure a tariff-free trade deal with the United States, accusing Carney of squandering Canada’s leverage, saying he has a plan to build leverage for tariff-free trade, and warning over two million jobs depend on U.S. trade.

Poilievre demands Prime Minister Mark Carney publicly clarify Canada’s position regarding forced labour in China, urging a clear yes-or-no statement on whether Carney believes forced labour occurs in China as Canada pursues stronger trade ties (including the Canada–China EV deal).

Poilievre says he will coordinate with the Prime Minister while traveling abroad, keep the government informed, avoid undermining official negotiations, and refrain from criticizing the prime minister on foreign soil to present a united Canadian front.

Poilievre says it is in Canada’s national interest for Iran’s regime to be removed and replaced by a democratically elected government; he expressed support for Carney’s initial backing of U.S. and Israeli airstrikes and urged strong, consistent leadership.

Poilievre urges Canada to take a strong, consistent stance aligned with allies, supports removing Iran’s regime to be replaced by a democratically elected government, and said he supported Carney’s initial endorsement of U.S. and Israeli airstrikes.

Pierre Poilievre says Canada's prosperity and security are inseparable from a stable Canada–U.S. relationship, opposes declaring a permanent rupture or pivoting toward China, and emphasizes the enduring, mutually beneficial partnership between the two peoples beyond transient governments.

Poilievre advocates strengthening and deepening free-trade ties among like-minded democratic nations (Canada, U.K., Australia, New Zealand), removing regulatory barriers, mutual recognition of approvals, and tighter economic integration to protect supply chains.

Pierre Poilievre supports Iran's democratic opponents, advocates toppling Iran's 'terror regime', calls for a free, permanently denuclearized Iran living peacefully with neighbors, and backs the U.S., Israel and Gulf allies defending sovereignty and dismantling Iran's clerical military dictatorship.

Poilievre argues Canada should remain aligned with the United States during trade talks and not pivot toward China; he says domestic unity is Canada's chief leverage in negotiations and warns against replacing the U.S. with a strategic partnership with Beijing.

Poilievre argues Canada should build domestic strength to increase leverage during the CUSMA review, preserve a stable relationship with the United States, and avoid substituting or permanently rupturing ties with the U.S. by pivoting toward China.

Poilievre proposes creating an all-party working group to oversee the Canada‑U.S.‑Mexico Agreement review, pledging bipartisan cooperation while scrutinizing the government's handling to protect Canadian interests and emphasizing focus on what Canada can control.

Pierre Poilievre opposes adding bureaucracy to defence procurement reforms, arguing the government should reduce, not expand, bureaucratic structures. He criticized plans that would create or elevate new agencies, urging cuts to bureaucracy rather than more administrative layers.

Poilievre criticizes the Liberal defence industrial strategy as creating extra bureaucracy that slows procurement, rejecting long 15–20‑year procurement processes and calling for faster, streamlined procurement to deliver results more quickly.

Pierre Poilievre explicitly supports ending Iran's current regime, expressing hope that the Iranian people will rise up to overthrow and put an end to what he called an 'appalling regime.'

Pierre Poilievre advocates strengthening Canada’s northern defence infrastructure: he proposes building a base in Churchill, opening new bases in Iqaluit and Inuvik, increasing icebreakers from two to four, cutting bureaucracy so defence spending "actually hit the front lines," and reasserting Arctic sovereignty.

Pierre Poilievre offered to fast-track parliamentary approval of pre-existing trade agreements, pledging Conservative support to quickly pass bills such as C-13 and C-18 (inviting the U.K. to the TPP and approving the Canada–Indonesia deal) negotiated before Carney took office.

Pierre Poilievre opposes the World Economic Forum and 'globalist Davos elites', calling them out and pledging that any cabinet he leads would be banned from attending the WEF, arguing attendees are out of touch with the needs of Canadians.

Pierre Poilievre calls for regime change in Iran, arguing Canada's national interest requires the current regime be defeated and replaced by the Iranian people with a peaceful democracy; he also criticized the prime minister for not participating in the House debate on the issue.

Pierre Poilievre strongly criticized Prime Minister Mark Carney’s decision to remove counter-tariffs, calling it 'weakness' and 'yet another capitulation and climb-down,' saying Carney's 'elbows have mysteriously gone missing' and that he 'has not thrown one elbow since he took office.'

Pierre Poilievre calls for the Lawrence Bishnoi gang to be designated a terrorist organization in Canada, arguing their violence is linked to terror and political motivations, and that designation will give police greater authority to crack down and end extortion.

Poilievre criticizes the government's handling of international trade disputes, calling the prime minister weak and accusing him of failing to negotiate deals or end tariffs — citing China’s canola tariffs as proof that countries exploit perceived weakness.

Voting Yea means supporting a legal limit on the government's ability to make trade negotiation concessions on supply‑managed products, signalling priority for domestic agricultural protections over negotiated market access.

Oppose this defense appropriation, opposing the proposed military spending

Support controlled mechanisms for Commission access to classified material with safeguards

Oppose establishing a statutory transboundary management regime or implementing the Canada–France framework

Voting Nay means opposing the CSIS supplementary appropriation, signaling concerns about intelligence spending levels or oversight.

Voting Nay means opposing tariff/customs changes required by the FTA, possibly to avoid reducing protection for domestic producers or changing tariff revenue structures.

Voting Nay means opposing the appropriation or payment of those operating costs, objecting to additional federal spending tied to the Agreement.

Voting Nay means opposing parliamentary approval or implementation of the Agreement (objecting to the trade commitments or giving the government authority to implement FTA measures).

Voting Nay means opposing embedding the Agreement's dispute settlement/arbitration procedures into domestic law, potentially to avoid binding external dispute outcomes or preserve domestic forum control.

Voting Nay means opposing the statutory obligation for ministerial oversight of Canadian companies' compliance with the Agreement's principles and guidelines (potentially citing regulatory burden or enforcement concerns).

Voting Nay means opposing repeal/replacement of the prior implementation statute or opposing the new legislative mechanism for implementing the 2023 Agreement.

Voting Yea means supporting clearer and potentially stricter criteria for trade‑agreement investor status and tighter timing/notice rules to ensure trade partners’ investors are appropriately screened under Canada’s national security framework.

Voting Yea means supporting stronger legal frameworks for sharing and protecting sensitive information between Canadian authorities and foreign counterparts as part of investment screening and for empowering ministers to impose interim measures to protect national security.

Voting Yea means supporting enhanced transparency and inter-jurisdictional information sharing to help detect and prevent terrorist financing and other security threats that exploit opaque corporate ownership.

Oppose these foreign aid and diplomatic funding allocations in the estimates.

Voting Yea means supporting integration of international organization/sanctions compliance into domestic authorization processes to ensure adherence to UN obligations.

Voting Yea means supporting a framework that allows necessary activities in terrorist‑controlled areas while requiring security assessments to limit terrorism financing risks.

Voting Yea means supporting legally enabling humanitarian actors to deliver aid in difficult contexts while imposing conditions to reduce risk of benefiting terrorist groups.

Supports promoting both official languages in Canada’s diplomatic activities

Oppose raising statutory limits on foreign financial assistance

Poilievre says the immigration system failed to investigate up to 150,000 alleged fraud cases, condemns Liberal ministers' incompetence, and demands they be fired for lacking capacity and oversight to address widespread fraud.

Pierre Poilievre called for cutting what he termed "deluxe benefits" for "fake refugees," announced a Conservative motion to review the Interim Federal Health Program, and sought to limit federal coverage for rejected asylum claimants to emergency, life‑saving care.

Pierre Poilievre says non-citizens who commit serious crimes "must be forced to leave our country," expressing support for removing convicted non-citizens and tightening asylum procedures to prevent such individuals from remaining in Canada.

Pierre Poilievre advocates scrapping the Temporary Foreign Worker program entirely, arguing it imports cheap, low-wage labour that displaces Canadian youth, increases youth unemployment, and replaces domestic workers with temporary foreign workers who are ultimately exploited.

Voting Nay means opposing these expansions/clarifications — preferring to retain stricter first-generation limits, historical exclusions, or current tests for conferring citizenship to those born abroad.

Voting Nay means opposing restoration and simplified renunciation provisions — preferring to keep prior retention-based losses in effect or handle renunciation through existing processes.

Poilievre says Conservatives will not support Bill C-2 as written because it violates Canadians' freedoms and privacy; he demands the Liberals reintroduce legislation targeting lawbreakers, restoring border order and removing fraudulent refugees while protecting lawful mail, internet and cash transactions.

Pierre Poilievre has personally called for ending the federal Temporary Foreign Worker Program; as leader of the Conservative Party he advocates terminating the program, publicly opposing its continued use by employers to hire temporary foreign workers.

Pierre Poilievre demands that the temporary foreign worker program be scrapped altogether and calls for strict limits on immigration, arguing the Liberals have taken in "too many, too quickly" and advocating "very hard caps" on newcomer numbers.

Pierre Poilievre has called for scrapping Canada's Temporary Foreign Worker Program, arguing the problem is a system that exploits temporary workers for cheap labour rather than the workers themselves, and aligning with calls to end or significantly reform the program.

Pierre Poilievre calls for scrapping or reforming Canada's temporary foreign worker program, arguing it shuts young Canadians out of jobs and drives down wages; he has publicly demanded Ottawa eliminate or overhaul the program to protect youth employment.

Support clarifying IRPA provisions to account for international relations and national defence considerations

Voting Nay means opposing the supplementary funding for the immigration department, which could limit program delivery capacity for settlement and integration services.

Support civilian oversight and review of CBSA conduct

Oppose CBSA appropriations included in the bill.

Oppose IRCC appropriations in this Act for processing and settlement supports.

Voting Nay means opposing the additional appropriations for CATSA's operating and capital expenditures, which could constrain aviation security operations or delay planned capital upgrades.

Voting Yea means supporting a mechanism to legally enable resettlement and safe‑passage assistance in hostile contexts under oversight and security vetting.

Oppose expanding inadmissibility grounds tied to offences on entry

Oppose shifting inadmissibility policy responsibility away from current ministerial home

Oppose tightening transport rules at ports of entry

Supports enshrining government commitment to protect and promote French

Supports statutory francophone immigration policy with targets and indicators

Voting Yea means supporting federal recognition of Arab Heritage Month as a multicultural initiative to celebrate and raise awareness of Arab Canadian history and contributions, and endorsing symbolic measures that promote community integration and inclusion.

Voting Yea means supporting longer authorized visitor stays for parents and grandparents, which changes how entry permissions are granted at ports of entry and affects border/immigration procedures.

Voting Yea means supporting measures that make it easier for parents and grandparents to stay in Canada for longer visits and directing review of the income threshold that can limit family reunification.