SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 203 - May/31/23

Mr. Clifford Small (Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, CPC)

May/31/23 2:13:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I remind the government that Atlantic Canada exists east of the Laurentians, and Atlantic Canadians are between a rock and a hard place. Last year, Newfoundland and Labrador's Liberal premier, Andrew Furey, stated, “Further cost increases at this point will only provide diminishing returns in terms of decarbonization while placing undue economic burdens on the people of this province.” All Atlantic premiers agreed, but the Prime Minister did not listen, so here we are in 2023, and Atlantic premiers are demanding that carbon tax 2.0 not be placed on fuel. They know it will have a devastating effect on fuel prices, which, in turn, will increase the cost of goods imported into the region. Carbon tax versions 1 and 2 will cost households in my province, when fully implemented, an extra $2,166 a year. Carbon tax 2 will be placed even on fuel that fishermen use to land their catch. It is time for the Prime Minister and his Minister of Environment to listen to the Atlantic premiers and scrap the carbon tax. Atlantic Canadians are not picking up what the government is laying down.

192 words

Context: House Hansard - 203 - May/31/23

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC)

May/31/23 2:51:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the carbon tax is not an environmental plan; it is a tax plan. It has done nothing to meet any targets, and it has done nothing to reduce the cost of climate change. What it has done is increase the cost of food, because when we tax the farmers who make the food and the truckers who ship the food, then we tax the food itself. Now, the Prime Minister's plan is not to triple the carbon tax but to quadruple the carbon tax, while he adds more and more. It is 61¢ a litre. My question is this. How much will his 61¢-a-litre carbon tax add to the monthly basket of food for Canadians?

122 words

Context: House Hansard - 203 - May/31/23

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC)

May/31/23 2:54:05 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, all of those things have happened with this carbon tax in place. This carbon tax has done nothing to reduce emissions, let alone stop storms and other weather events. That is nothing more than another act from the Prime Minister. Let us get back to the question. My question was very specific. We know that a British Columbia family has to spend $1,200 a month on groceries just to feed their kids. He wants to raise the tax up to 61¢ a litre on the farmers and truckers who bring us our food. How much will that add to the grocery bill of an average family?

110 words

Context: House Hansard - 203 - Jun/1/23

Mr. Mel Arnold (North Okanagan—Shuswap, CPC)

Jun/1/23 12:10:58 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am here tonight, after midnight, for this adjournment debate as a result of another non-answer from the government side. When I originally rose in question period, the government member's response to the question at that time was some non-answer about much money people in the member's province were going to get back of the money that his government had previously taxed from them, and then some incoherent words about conspiracy theories and cryptocurrency. Since I posed that initial question, we have learned that the minister plans to add carbon tax 2.0 to the backs of Canadian taxpayers. This new carbon tax will add an additional 17¢ per litre to the current tax, and with the sales tax on the carbon taxes, it will mean up to 61¢ per litre as a result of carbon taxes, another burden that Canadians are being forced to bear to pay for the government’s overspending habit. The second carbon tax will cost the average Canadian household $573 per year, without any rebate, costing some families in some provinces as much as $1,157. These numbers are from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. I want to put this into perspective. It has been 15 years since a carbon tax was implemented in B.C., a tax that initially started at 2.41¢ per litre. It originally started out as a revenue-neutral tax; the revenues would go directly toward reducing personal income taxes. That was until an NDP government decided the B.C. carbon tax would no longer be revenue-neutral, but would instead go into general revenue to help pay for the NDP government’s overspending habit. I think the members listening will see the similarities here in establishing a small tax initially, gradually turning up the heat, hoping people would be distracted by other crises, and then using those tax dollars to pay for bad spending habits. Once more, we have evidence of the indistinguishable ideologies of the Liberals and the NDP, as such, the NDP-Liberal coalition we are currently dealing with, which is making Canadians pay for the government’s bad spending habit. I am sure the Liberal member will come back with some comment about how the carbon tax and carbon tax 2.0 are somehow going to prevent wildfires or flooding, but they have yet to show how that is going to be accomplished. The government has failed to meet any emissions targets, and instead of facilitating the export of cleaner Canadian natural gas to high-emissions countries, they have left those countries to seek out coal and other dirty energy sources from countries with poor environmental and human rights standards, a poor, if not failed, record at best. Will the government take control of its bad spending habit, stop pushing higher taxes on Canadians, who are already struggling under its inflationary policies, and cancel the planned tax increases?

493 words