SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 103

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 27, 2022 10:00AM
  • Sep/27/22 11:20:41 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am still in shock. I would like to thank my colleague for his question, because it gives me a chance to gather my thoughts. In fact, this is all so absurd that I am struggling to make sense of it. It is important to understand that the leader of the Conservative Party is not crazy, not at all, so we have to ask why he did not know that. The answer is that he does not care. He is switched on to what western Canada wants. He listens to what his cronies in Alberta and Saskatchewan want and caters to their needs. Then he says he wants to be the prime minister for all Canadians and expects us believe that. What he really wants is to defend the views of western Canada and then try to sell those views to everyone else, including Quebec. I have to tell my Conservative friends that they will find us, the Bloc Québécois, standing in their way.
170 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/27/22 2:10:13 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the new Conservative leader will put people first: their paycheques, their homes, their retirements and their country, unlike the current government. The people of Saskatchewan are sick and tired of the government promising support and then offering them absolutely nothing. Rural communities are going to be decimated because of it. While the minister talks publicly about his government's support for the workers who will be out of a job following the shutdown of coal-fired power in 2030, he has taken zero steps to provide them and their communities with the resources needed to avoid this catastrophe. A study showed that the town of Coronach in my riding stands to lose $400 million in GDP, have a 67% loss in population and an 89% loss in household income, yet of the funds provided by the government, only 3.5% were for economic development activities. The minister put out an op-ed last week on how these workers need certainty, but he needs to put his money where his mouth is. He says he wants to kill the emissions but he is killing an entire industry and communities instead.
191 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/27/22 3:41:37 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have been sent here to represent the constituents of Battlefords—Lloydminster, which is in Saskatchewan. I have always been against a carbon tax. I know how ineffective and costly the carbon tax is. I have bills here from a small business owner, and 25% is what he is paying on the carbon tax. That was before the last hike. What is that doing for the environment? I can tell members what it is doing for the business environment: crushing it.
84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Speaker, it truly is an honour to speak in support of our opposition day motion for the Liberals not to increase the carbon tax. I want to read a couple of quotes from agriculture producers I met with this summer, including a farmer in Ontario who told me the only threat to the success of his family farm is Liberal government policy. A Saskatchewan farmer said, “When it comes to farming, I feel like I'm digging my own grave to follow my dream.” In fact, a recent survey showed that the biggest stressor for Canadian farm families is not commodity prices and it is not weather. It is government policy and regulation. I would say, for the first time, Canadian farmers see their government as an adversary, not an ally. This is having a huge impact on the financial and mental health of our Canadian farmers. According to a survey on farmer mental health by the University of Guelph, 75% of farmers have mid to high stress levels and farmers are four times more likely to commit suicide than any other part of the general population. This is the kind of stress and anxiety that our Canadian farm families are facing, and their number one stressor is the policies and regulations imposed on them by the Liberal government. I will take a moment to look at a couple of them before I get in depth on the carbon tax. Last November, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change announced there would be a fertilizer emissions reduction of 30%, with no consultation and no idea exactly what that would mean. However, now it is putting further pressure on Canadian farm families regarding what they are going to do to make themselves economically viable as the government takes away some of the most important tools they have. Why is the government not looking at our hard-working Canadian farm families, our innovators, our agri-food businesses and our researchers as a critical part of the climate change solution? It is almost looking at them with disdain, instead of looking at them as part of the solution. For example, in 1981, the average farmer was getting about 27 bushels to the acre. Now they are getting more than 50, but the kicker is that they are doing that on less than half of the acreage, significantly reducing their carbon footprint. Do they get any credit for that whatsoever? No, they do not. On average, we are 50% more efficient in fertilizer use than any other country on the face of the earth. Do Canadian farmers get any credit for that? No, they do not. Instead, when it came to this fertilizer emissions reduction policy, here is the narrative the Liberal government should have had. When the European Union started making massive cuts to fertilizer use in livestock production, that was its decision, but the Liberal government should have said, if there is an issue in the European Union, why not look at what we are doing here in Canada? Why not look at our innovators, our farmers, our experience, our technology, practices like precision farming, variable rates, 4R nutrient stewardship and show Canadians just how impressive Canadian agriculture is? Instead, its fallback every single time is to look at Canadian farmers, much like it does our energy workers, as the enemy rather than part of the solution. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, even if the carbon tax is increased to $170 a tonne, does anyone know what the impact on emissions from agriculture is? It is zero. The reason is that there are no other options. Farmers right now, many of them use combines and they cannot fuel them with anything other than diesel. As one of my Liberal colleagues told me a few months ago, they cannot put a solar panel on top of those machines. They run 24-7. They do not have any other options. This is what they do to ensure that they can not only feed Canadians but feed the world. Now I would like to focus on the carbon tax specifically. We heard it again today in question period. In answer to a question from one of my colleagues, the parliamentary secretary said that farmers are exempt from the carbon tax on all farm fuels. That is patently not true. Some fuels are exempt, but fuels like natural gas and propane are still subject to the carbon tax. The Liberals are either misleading Canadian farmers or they really do not understand their own policy. The parliamentary secretary said in committee that, even talking to farmers in his riding, and he talked about it again in question period today, we have Bill C-8. We have a farm carbon tax rebate. The message from the Liberals is always that the carbon tax is revenue neutral. We now know from Ontario grain farmers, from the Department of Finance and from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture that this is also not true. Farmers are getting less than 30% and in some cases less than 15% of what they are paying in carbon tax, through that rebate from the Liberal government. In fact, the Department of Finance said that the average farmer was getting $800 a year through the carbon tax rebate. I have seen the carbon tax bills from some of my farmers, especially large poultry operations, large dairy operations and certainly our grain growers here in Ontario, who are drying grain or heating barns. Their carbon tax bills are in the thousands and sometimes tens of thousands of dollars a month. When we hear the finance department say that it is revenue neutral because the farmers are getting $800 a month, that is a slap in the face to Canadian producers who are certainly carrying the burden of the carbon tax. It has basically become wealth distribution on the back of Canadian agriculture. When a Canadian farmer is getting between 13% and, on a good day, up to maybe 30% for their carbon tax rebate, members can see why, as the opposition in the Conservative Party, we are so adamant that we cannot see this carbon tax continue to rise and triple to $170 per tonne. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business also ratified and confirmed the numbers from the Grain Farmers of Ontario, saying that, in the first year, the average farmer paid about $14,000 in carbon tax. After it went up this previous April 1, the average farmer is now paying $45,000 in carbon taxes. My math is not always the greatest, but between $45,000 and $800 there is a big gap, which certainly shows that the carbon tax is not revenue neutral. The frustrating thing is that the finance department know it and the Minister of Agriculture knows it, and the Liberals continue to allow this to happen. The Minister of Agriculture is complicit in seeing Canadian farmers being taxed to death. They are going to be losing their businesses. We have put forward two private members' bills: one in the previous Parliament and one in this Parliament. The one in this Parliament is Bill C-234, which would exempt the carbon tax from all farm fuels. I am very happy to say that we have the support of all the opposition parties, which include the Conservatives, the Bloc, the New Democrats and the Greens. The holdout is the Liberal Party, the government, which still does not see that this was an error. The carbon tax should be exempt on all farm fuels and not just a couple. This is imperative to the financial success of Canadian farmers. Farmers are the ones who are paying the carbon tax over and over again. When buying fuel, buying feed, buying fertilizer, transporting grain and transporting cattle, they are paying the carbon tax every single time. Here is the kicker: Many Canadian consumers see this as an agriculture problem and a rural issue, but farmers have nowhere to pass those costs on to. The result of that is seeing food prices go up more than 10%, which is the highest rate of inflation on food in more than 40 years. This impacts every single Canadian in every single corner of the country, as many Canadians are unable to put food on the table. By tripling the carbon tax, which we are asking the Liberals not to do in a time of record inflation, they are demanding Canadians to pay more to fuel their out-of-control spending. They are demanding seniors to pay more. They are demanding that youth pay more. They are demanding single mothers to pay more. They are demanding our small business owners to pay more. They are certainly demanding our Canadian farmers to pay more. It is nonsensical, especially in a time of global food insecurity, when we need our Canadian agriculture to be firing on all cylinders to meet the demand that we are going to see, not only here at home but also around the world. Therefore, I am asking my colleagues from all parts of the House to support our opposition day motion to ensure the financial and mental health of our Canadian farmers first and foremost because they are part of the solution. They are not the problem.
1558 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/27/22 6:10:08 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I ask that the House give unanimous consent to support the Province of Saskatchewan's environmental plan. Saskatchewan's plan mirrors the plan of other provinces that the Liberal government has accepted. Therefore, based on fair and equal treatment of provinces within the dominion of Canada, Saskatchewan's plan should be accepted and approved by the government of the day.
62 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/27/22 6:24:10 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, through you, I wish to give virtual greetings to my friend from Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan. We are seeing higher inflation rates and higher costs of living around the world as a result of many factors, which include the war in Ukraine; global supply chain bottlenecks, in large part due to the pandemic; and, global energy market uncertainty. That being said, inflation in Canada, at 7%, has slowed and is now more than one percentage point below its June peak; moreover, it is lower here than among many of our peers, such as the United States at 8.3%, United Kingdom at 9.9% and Germany at 7.9%. Elevated inflation is not a unique Canadian problem, but we are uniquely positioned to deal with it. We have the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. We have a AAA credit rating, and according to the International Monetary Fund, Canada will have the fastest-growing economy in the G7 both this year and next. This means we can build a comprehensive affordability plan for Canadians while continuing to reduce our debt-to-GDP ratio, and that is exactly what we are doing. Our affordability plan is a suite of targeted inflation-relief measures totalling $12.1 billion in new support for those Canadians who need it the most. This is about balancing fiscal responsibility with compassion. We know that the pandemic has been a major shock to the economic livelihoods of Canadians and Canadian businesses, and we know that recent global events have pushed us even further. It is important that we address these challenges while not adding further fuel to the inflationary fire. Let us be absolutely clear. The suite of measures that comprise our affordability plan will support Canadians without increasing inflation. Many economists, including the former deputy parliamentary budget office, University of Calgary's Lindsay Tedds and Alberta economist Trevor Tombe, have all agreed that this support package for Canadians is non-inflationary. Let us now turn to fighting climate change and our national price on pollution. First, fighting climate change is an absolute necessity for the future of our planet, and let us also acknowledge that the effects of climate change are also an inflationary pressure on our economy. It is well known that having a national price on pollution is a highly effective market mechanism for reducing greenhouse gas emissions while making life more affordable for the majority of Canadians. Through debates all this session, Conservatives have tried to correlate the massive increase in the price of gas with the federal carbon price. This is simply not true. In 2019, the carbon price was approximately nine cents per litre in British Columbia. Today, it is 11¢ per litre. That means that although gas prices have increased by more than a dollar per litre, only two cents of that increase can be attributed to the price of pollution in B.C. over the last three years. Further to that, because the carbon price in British Columbia is provincially administered, if the federal carbon price were eliminated, as the Conservatives are suggesting and the member opposite is suggesting, this would result in zero savings for residents of British Columbia. Instead, it would simply mean that other jurisdictions, such as Alberta and Saskatchewan, would do less to fight climate change. In jurisdictions like Alberta and Saskatchewan where the federal carbon price is in place, it is important to know that approximately 90% of directed proceeds are directly returned to residents and that the fee is revenue neutral to the federal government. Further, with the climate action incentive, carbon pricing actually makes life more affordable for 80% of Canadian households. I hope that the member opposite will share this information with his colleagues and convince his caucus to go back to supporting carbon pricing, as those members previously did, less than 12 months ago.
650 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/27/22 6:42:57 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to remind the member for Regina—Lewvan that this government has been making significant investments in Canadian agriculture. I am glad that he has been asking many questions, but I am going to stick to agriculture, as that is my passion and my job in the House. I would remind the hon. member as well of the way our government has been supporting agriculture. Our total budget for 2021-22 was just shy of $4 billion, the highest in recent years. I would also remind him that there was $400 million cut when the Conservatives' hero, Mr. Harper, was in government. We have put back $500 million, and I am glad that the Province of Saskatchewan signed on this July for the federal-provincial-territorial meeting, which created a new program. This includes historic investments in innovation, business risk management, market development and compensating our producers and processors under supply management. We fully recognize that the price of inputs increased due to a number of factors, including COVID and supply-chain disruptions, which is why we have taken concrete actions to help producers facing this challenge. We increased interest-free loans to provide them with the necessary cash flow to access key inputs, such as fertilizer. We increased the interest-free portion of the advance payments program from $100,000 to $250,000 to help producers cover the cost of inputs, including fertilizer, which is an average savings of $7,700 per producer and a total savings of $69 million over two years for the approximately 11,000 producers who take advantage of advances above $100,000. Canadian producers have access to business risk management programs, and we continue to make them more bankable for them. In July, federal, provincial and territorial ministers agreed to increase the compensation rate under AgriStability to 80%, and I think that is good news for Saskatchewan. It would be up to an additional $72 million per year to better support our farmers in times of need. This builds on our removal last year of the reference margin limit, which could increase the overall amount that the program pays out to Canadian farmers by another $95 million a year. We worked hard to ensure that Canadian producers have the support they need to succeed in the 2022 growing season, and producers have responded. As the harvest nears completion, Statistics Canada is projecting significant increases in production this year compared to last year, with over 55% for wheat and almost 40% for canola. Let me remind the House that climate change is real. Last year, western farmers lost 38.5% of their crops. On this side of the House, we needed to act as this supports agriculture across Canada, and we are closely monitoring the situation with regard to the sourcing of the fertilizer needed for 2023.
477 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/27/22 6:47:09 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the member is so passionate about agriculture, and that is the one thing we share, whether from eastern Ontario or from Saskatchewan. We have had the opportunity to sit together on the ag committee, and while we are trading barbs, we are still friends outside of the House. I can assure the member that for the 30% emissions reduction, we will achieve that by providing incentives and not by regulation. There will be no bans on fertilizer of any sort, it is just a matter of providing incentives, and farmers have done an amazing job. Some farmers have adopted 4R, and we have provided some funding to the Canola Council of Canada so that it can increase the uptake on the 4R program with canola farmers out west. I think that is great news for agriculture, and I am sure that the hon. member will welcome the $500 million more of investments in agriculture that we announced this year, and that we announced in partnership with Saskatchewan.
169 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border