SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 291

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 19, 2024 10:00AM
  • Mar/19/24 1:24:16 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I do not know if my colleagues from English Canada are aware that what we have been hearing in the House this morning is a ringing endorsement for Quebec sovereignty. In Quebec, we are concerned about fighting climate change. Our province has the lowest greenhouse gas emissions, by the way, because we have taken action, because we rely on hydroelectricity and batteries. This morning, we have been hearing two things. On the one hand, we hear that the government has been spending a lot of money for years and has the world's worst record. Canada has the worst record when it comes to fighting climate change, despite quite needlessly throwing billions of dollars out there, with help from the NDP, which supports the government most of the time. On the other hand, we have the Conservatives saying that they are going to do even less. All Canadians are saying that no matter how much they spend or do not spend, they are getting nowhere. This is really a ringing endorsement for Quebec sovereignty. I hope that all Quebeckers are watching this debate today and taking note.
190 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/19/24 2:22:56 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, families in Ontario are facing higher prices for groceries and higher costs for rent, and we are delivering a Canada carbon rebate that leaves them better off. Eight out of 10 Canadian families across the country have more money in their pockets with the Canada carbon rebate than the price on pollution costs them. At the same time, the price on pollution is bringing down carbon emissions, preparing a cleaner economy for the future and putting more money back in Canadians' pockets. The Conservatives want to take away the Canada carbon rebate cheques. We are going to continue to support families on affordability and fighting climate change.
109 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/19/24 3:21:03 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-59 
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the very hon. member for Kings—Hants. It is my absolute pleasure, as always, to be speaking on behalf of the residents in my riding of Davenport. I will be speaking to today's opposition day motion that was put forward by the Conservatives on affordability and pollution pricing. I will start with a few of my own comments and then I will go into a bit of prepared text. As members know, climate change is real. Carbon emissions are impacting our climate and causing the climate to change. If Canada does not continue to rapidly move toward reducing emissions now, the cost of waiting will be more expensive for Canadians later. As a result, it will be a world that will be more difficult and more unpredictable to live in. Last week, I happened to have been blessed to have the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources in my riding, and the question of the carbon tax came up by a Davenport resident, who said that given the fact that Canadians were suffering an affordability crisis and as of April 1 the price on pollution would go up, should people believe the Leader of the Opposition who was trying to convince a lot of Canadians that the price on pollution was a tax that would hurt Canadians? The minister responded by saying that there were the facts and then there was perception, that putting a price on pollution would be the most economically efficient way to reduce carbon emissions and that if people asked 100 economists, 99 and a half of them would tell them that it was true. He went on to say that the way in which we had structured it was to do it in a way that would make it affordable for Canadians. Therefore, eight out of 10 Canadian families would get more money back than they paid, and it worked directly disproportionate to income. Those who lived on the most modest means would get much more money back than they actually paid. The people who received less money back than they paid were people who lived in 6,000 square foot houses, had a Hummer in their driveway and a boat in the backyard. At the end of the day, the fact that they paid more was because they were polluting more. It was also noted that the Premier of Saskatchewan had decided that he would stop remitting the price on pollution for home heating. As a direct result of that, the rebate would go down for people in Saskatchewan, and the people who would suffer most would be the those people who were living on modest incomes. The premier was making poor people poorer because of the choices that he was making. The motion before us is also proposing to do that for Canadians. In 2023, we saw a record fire season in Canada in which the area burned was more than double that of the historic record, with hundreds of thousands of Canadians evacuated from their homes as a result. The total area burned exceeded 18 million hectares, which is two and a half times the previous record set in 1995 and more than six times the average over the past 10 years. In its 2020 report on climate risks and their implications for the insurance industry in Canada, the Insurance Bureau of Canada also concluded that “The average annual severe weather claims paid by insurers in Canada could more than double over the next 10 years, increasing from $2.1-billion a year to $5-billion a year, and must be accompanied by an increase in premium income.” It is clear that there are very real costs associated with having one's house burn down or having to flee one's home and job due to an evacuation order. We also know from experts and research that the most effective and efficient way to address climate change is to put a price on carbon pollution emissions, which are the chief cause of man-made climate change. Putting a price on carbon pollution reduces emissions and encourages reductions across the economy, while giving households and businesses the flexibility to decide when and how to make changes. It creates incentives for Canadian business to develop and adopt new low-carbon products, processes and services, and when it is done right, and we are doing that in Canada, it is both effective and affordable for Canadians. On the Canada carbon rebate, the bulk of the proceeds from the federal pollution pricing system goes straight back into the pockets of Canadians in provinces where the fuel charge applies, with eight out of 10 households in these provinces continuing to get more money back through their quarterly Canada carbon rebate payments than they pay as a result of the federal pollution pricing system. The federal government understands that we need to maintain the price signal that, over the long term, is necessary for carbon pricing to work and bring emissions down, but at the same time we have also shown that we are willing to be flexible and innovative in supporting options that will go even further to cut down on climate pollution in the long run. We took temporary and targeted action to pause the fuel charge on heating oil with the goal of getting consumers off home heating oil and onto a cleaner and far more affordable alternative solution that will save them thousands of dollars and lower carbon emissions over the long run. Measures such as this will make life more affordable in the right way, while supporting the goal of achieving a prosperous, low-carbon future for all Canadians. We know that there are better ways to make life more affordable for Canadians, ways that do not involve destroying the environment and incurring more devastating costs further down the road. We are delivering this support where it is most effective, including with the oil to heat pump affordability program, which will increase the amount of federal funding that eligible homeowners can receive for installing a heat pump from $10,000 to $15,000. It includes proposing, under Bill C-59, a doubling of the Canada carbon rebate rural top-up rate, increasing it from 10% to 20% of the base rebate amount starting in April 2024. People who live in rural communities face unique realities, and this measure will help put even more money back in the pockets of families that are dealing with higher energy costs because they live outside a large city. We have been very clear that we will continue to implement our pollution pricing system while ensuring that we continue to put more money into the pockets of Canadian households and families. More recently, through Bill C-59, the fall economic statement implementation act of 2023, we introduced measures to advance the government’s fiscally responsible plan to build a cleaner, stronger economy. It introduces measures to create well-paying jobs, generate growth and build a cleaner economy that works for everyone by advancing Canada’s competitiveness through the implementation of investment tax credits. Investment tax credits are a key part of the government’s broader plan to work with industry towards the goal of decarbonization. This includes the carbon capture, utilization and storage investment tax credit, which is also known as CCUS. CCUS is a suite of technologies that capture carbon dioxide emissions, whether from fuel combustion, from industrial processes or directly from the air, either to store CO2, typically deep underground, or to use it in other industrial processes, such as mineralization in concrete. These technologies are an important tool for reducing emissions in high-emitting sectors, where other pathways to reduce emissions may be limited or unavailable. In fact, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the International Energy Agency each include CCUS deployment as an important element of scenarios in which the world achieves net-zero emissions. For its part, the CCUS investment tax credit will not only help Canadian companies adopt clean technologies but will also create jobs, ensure Canadian businesses remain globally competitive and reduce Canada’s emissions at the same time. In conclusion, making life more affordable for Canadians while protecting the environment has always been a priority for the federal Liberal government, and it remains a priority today. I have outlined over the last 10 minutes just a few examples of how we are making targeted and responsible investments to help Canadians find an affordable place to call home. We want to ensure that Canada remains the best place in the world to live, work, go to school and raise a family. Making life more affordable is a key part of that. It is a pleasure to speak on behalf of the residents of my riding of Davenport on this opposition day motion about affordability and pollution pricing. I am now very happy to take any questions.
1503 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this place, and in particular for such an important conversation, because we are in a cost of living crisis and the Liberal-NDP government could not care less. I can guarantee that the most common thing every MP in the chamber hears when they are back in their riding is that the cost of living is out of control. From groceries to gas and home heating, and everything in between, it has all become unaffordable for everyone. What is the solution in the minds of the costly coalition? It is to ram through a 23% carbon tax hike on April 1. How out of touch can someone be? Nobody I have talked to has said, "You know what might help? What if we sent more money to Ottawa?” Nobody believes they are better off under the carbon tax, and this is why we are witnessing a carbon tax revolt. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has been crystal clear: Canadians are losing hundreds of dollars each year, which will turn into thousands of dollars if we do not stop the planned quadrupling of the carbon tax. Across this country, thousands of ordinary people are going to rallies to axe the tax. Young families, seniors, veterans, small business owners and new Canadians are all showing up en masse to add their voices to the growing chorus of discontent. They cannot afford to live with a decent quality of life anymore, never mind actually get ahead, and their Liberal and NDP MPs have turned their back on them. People will no longer sit in silence. They are tired of being told to shut up and just take it. They refuse to be lectured to by the Prime Minister because they dare to oppose his carbon tax. The good news is that they are not alone. Two-thirds of Canadians oppose the 23% carbon tax hike, and it is no wonder people are mad. The Prime Minister and his NDP coalition partners sneer at people who drive long distances to go to work or to pick up their groceries. They ignore the legitimate concerns of seniors who can no longer afford to heat their home on the coldest of nights, and from their ivory tower they disparage anyone who points out the obvious: the carbon tax plan is a tax plan, not an environment plan. My Liberal colleagues who do not believe me can look at the Order Paper question where their Minister of Environment admitted they do not even measure the annual amount of emissions directly reduced by their carbon tax. Even he admits they do not know whether the carbon tax is reducing emissions, so why are we paying for it? The ridiculousness does not end there. The same minister went to a conference of municipal leaders and proclaimed Canada does not need any more new roads or highways, and while it took a couple days to clean up the environment minister's mess, the damage was done. The people living in communities like Carman, Sanford, Brunkild and Sperling heard the message loud and clear that the Liberal government does not think that Highway 3 should be twinned, for example. Municipal leaders immediately started calling me, furious with the new Liberal plan to stop building roads in this country. What should really worry the Liberals is that, given their track record, nobody was actually surprised by such an out-of-touch and ridiculous announcement. Let us never forget that the Prime Minister scoffs at farmers who use propane or natural gas to dry their grain or heat their livestock barns. In fact, he pulled out all the stops to gut Bill C-234, making the bill about $900 million worse in the eyes of farms. What is sad is that I do not think the Prime Minister even loses a wink of sleep over how his carbon tax is punishing farm families like those that live in places like Altona, Rathwell, Roland, Elm Creek and Oakville. These farmers are paying thousands of dollars in carbon taxes to stop their grain from sprouting or spoiling in the bin. When grocery prices are at record highs, who thinks it is a bright idea to make it that much more expensive to grow and produce the food we all eat? My constituents will also never forget when the Prime Minister gave a carbon tax carve-out to 3% of Canadian households and left the other 97% out in the cold. People living in places like Winkler, Morden, Portage and Plum Coulee did not get the carve-out on their home heating. They too were ignored. It was not until the Atlantic Liberal caucus was on the brink of a full-out revolt that the Prime Minister thought he could placate it by giving a temporary reprieve on the carbon tax to those who use home heating oil. While he may have stopped the insurgency within his own Liberal caucus, he reminded Canadians how politically calculating and motivated he can be when pushed into a corner. Atlantic Canadians are not the fools he took them for. They saw right through his hope of buying their vote before hiking their taxes again after the next election. We only have to look at the words of the Liberal Minister of Rural Economic Development to see why some people got a carve-out and others did not. It was because the good people living in communities like Morris, Rosenfeld, Starbuck and Mariapolis do not vote Liberal. The sad reality is that the Prime Minister cares only about the people who vote for him rather than about doing what is right for all Canadians. Now, on the verge of April 1, seven out of 10 premiers have publicly called upon the Prime Minister to cancel his 23% carbon tax hike. I do not recall the last time that seven premiers were openly opposed to a federal government policy. In my province of Manitoba, the NDP premier is not really saying much about the carbon tax hike. He said he has had private conversations with the Prime Minister on the matter, but it is telling that an NDP premier will not publicly defend the carbon tax hike. Who knows? Maybe he will see the writing on the wall and talk to our constituents, and he might even join the coalition of the common sense. Among the seven premiers who oppose the 23% carbon tax hike, one just happens to be the Liberal premier of Newfoundland and Labrador. That Liberal premier did something rather brave, which was to stand up to the Prime Minister. It was not easy for the premier to go against the grain of his own party, and for doing so, the Prime Minister accused him of being a short-sighted thinker, but unlike most of the Liberal MPs from Newfoundland and Labrador, this Liberal stood up for the people he represents. Before the Liberal MP for Avalon was placed in the witness protection program, he agreed with our Conservative caucus on the carbon tax and went so far as to call for a leadership review of the Prime Minister. In response to his comments, I called for every Canadian to have a review of the Prime Minister's leadership. It is called an election. It is time. Obviously the Prime Minister wants the carbon tax election, so let us have it. It would seem wrong not to mention what the Liberal member for Avalon summed up when he said, “People are thinking maybe it’s time for a change. I tell everybody—every leader, every party has a best-before date. Our best-before date is here.” Conservatives could not agree more. The reason people are opposing the carbon tax hike is that they have no more nickels and dimes to give. Close to 50% of families are $200 away from declaring insolvency. Look at the skyrocketing number of people visiting food banks to get a clear picture of what is going on in our country right now. Every day, I and, I assume, all of my colleagues get emails from constituents who are struggling to get by. Just last week I received a letter from a senior who cannot afford to put gas in her car just to get to her doctor's appointments. She cannot afford to buy fruits and vegetables, and due to high food prices, she now does the bulk of her grocery shopping at Dollarama. In closing, I urge Liberal MPs to stand up for their constituents who cannot afford to pay their bills and put food on their family's table, to vote in favour of our Conservative motion to spike the hike, and to be honest with themselves and acknowledge the last thing people can afford right now is another tax hike. There is no shame in acknowledging that the carbon tax has been a failure, in terms of both of our cost of living and reducing emissions. In fact, I think people would prefer that politicians admit when they are wrong, pivot and do what is right for the people we are sent here to serve rather than continuing down the path of ideology, and that they try to be a bit more pragmatic. I hope that the common sense of the common people might just break through to the NDP-Liberal government. I fear it will not, which is why we need the carbon tax election, because it is time to axe the tax on everything for everyone, and for good.
1606 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/19/24 4:36:32 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will get to the conversation around pricing pollution, but I want to start with a threshold question that we all have to answer: Do members care to take action to save our planet? Do they care to reduce emissions for our kids? Do they care? If the answer is yes, then we get to a different question, which is how we are going to reduce emissions in the most efficient way. If we want to respect taxpayer dollars, then we reduce emissions in the most efficient way. We hear a lot about common sense from across the aisle. Common sense presumably should be that polluters pay, and pollution, members should know, is a classic market failure. I have heard some people bandying about different economic opinions on what a market failure is. In this case, the cost of polluting is costless to the polluter and is borne collectively by all of us. What is the answer to that? The answer is a price signal. The common-sense answer, very simply, is to make polluters pay. That is what this price on pollution does. We do not want to penalize people or make them worse off. We just want to change the behaviour, so matched with that price, internalizing that negative externality, we make sure there is a rebate and recycle the revenue. I have heard people go back and forth on this. The fact is that, of the 100% of the revenue that goes back to the provinces of origin, 90% goes back to households directly. If there were a motion today that said that 100% should go back to households, I would vote for it for sure. We could improve it, but the fact is that 90% goes back. It is largely revenue-neutral. I heard a question asking if it works. Of course it works. This is not me saying this. If we look at the emissions progress report for 2030, we see more than a steady decline. We see a decline from business as usual. If we had taken no action from 2015 on, or the kind of action we saw under the Harper government, we would have seen emissions rise to 815 megatonnes by 2030. If we look at that progress report, does anyone in the House know what it stands to be with all of the action we have put into place? It stands to be 467 megatonnes, which is not nearly enough and not where we need it to be, but that is a 43% reduction from business as usual and 36% toward our 40% target. We are very close to being where we say we want to be. By the way, a good amount of that is because of the price on pollution. The progress report says that 30% of that reduction in emissions comes from the price on pollution. When we look at that delta of 815 megatonnes down to 467 megatonnes, 23% of that total reduction from business as usual comes from the price on pollution, so, yes, it works as part of a very serious overall comprehensive climate plan. It is easy to care about climate change when we are well fed. I have heard a lot of talk in the House that the price on pollution is making people poorer, the worst among us, and it is hurting those who are already hurting. It is deeply cynical to trade on a real affordability crisis, to trade on the real stress and real struggles of so many people in need, to undermine an effective and efficient climate action that makes most households whole. It does not increase the cost of everything to send people to food banks. I said this when asking a question of a colleague and did not receive a good answer. We have seen 20% food inflation these last two years, and the price on pollution, economists tell us, accounts for under 1% of any inflationary impact. That is not the cause of the affordability crisis. We could have a very interesting debate about interest rates. Maybe the member for Carleton would tell us that he wants to fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. We have had very interesting debates about interest rates and what is truly driving the cost of living crisis. It is absolutely not, economists will tell us, the price on pollution. We could also have an interesting debate about social welfare in this country. We have increased the Canada child benefit significantly. We have brought hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty. We have increased the Canada workers benefit. We have increased the GIC for seniors. Do members know what provincial governments have done, largely Conservative provincial governments? They have not increased welfare and disability supports in line with the rise in inflation. I am standing here in Ontario, and the member could tell me what the Ford government has done to make sure disability payments keep pace with the cost of inflation, but Conservatives have done next to nothing. Do we want to talk about the real cost of living crisis and what drives that cost of living crisis? We could talk about food inflation. We could talk about interest rates, and we could talk about the lack of provincial action in their areas of responsibility. What we should not talk about, if we care about facts in the House, is the price on pollution. Much has been made of the PBO report. I wonder sometimes, listening to the debate in the House, whether anyone has actually read this report, so let me quote from it. On a fiscal basis, “most households will see a net gain [versus] the...fuel charge...and related GST”. As well, “The fiscal-only impact...is broadly progressive.” Hang on. What is this about? The PBO says it is going to cost us more. I am going to be absolutely fair in this, and there is a real debate we should have because what the PBO actually says is that, on a fiscal basis, for the cash-in, cash-out money that households pay and get back, 80% of households are, in fact, better off. What the PBO goes on to say is that, when one takes into account GDP impacts from the price on pollution, we see modest GDP reductions, though they are significant on a household basis, so most households are worse off if one includes fiscal and economic factors. They do not say that about low-income households so, again, trading on food banks and offering no real suggestions for helping people out of poverty is completely incorrect, even in the PBO's analysis. Let us focus a little more on whether the PBO is right. Fiscal analysis is easy. It is money in and money out. On an economic basis, I would say they are wrong. It is not gospel. We have this from the American Economic Journal, for example, on the macro impact of carbon pricing: “We find no evidence for a negative impact on employment or GDP growth but rather find a zero to modest positive impact.” There is also this, from the IMF, from June: “Countries that do not recycle revenues experience a substantial economic downturn while countries that recycle revenues only display a muted impact on economic activity.” For those keeping track at home, Canada recycles revenues. Worse, and this is fatal, let me quote the PBO as well. I wonder how this is not part of the conversation: “The scope of the report is limited to estimating the distributional impact of the federal fuel charge and does not attempt to account for the economic and environmental costs of climate change.” Maybe Conservatives could explain to me why we would consider the negative economic impacts of one side of the ledger of the price on pollution, and the fiscal impacts are better for households, but we would not consider alternative scenarios. We hear about “technology, not taxes”, but that is going to cost households more. It is going to be paid for by taxes or, worse, if we do not take into account the real economic costs of unchecked climate change. Let us be absolutely clear. If one does not have a serious climate plan in this country, and the federal Conservatives are not interested in a serious climate plan, we are going to see unchecked climate change. Let us return to costs. We have Conservatives who have no plan. Since I have been in Parliament, they have had no plan, except for Erin O'Toole, who was promptly ousted. Why was he ousted? For having a plan, and “technology, not taxes” is not a plan. What does the price on pollution do? The price on pollution says to consumers that it will be more expensive to pollute. Consumers will seek out cleaner alternatives and businesses will respond by innovating to meet consumer demand. If one does not have that price, which is internalizing that negative externality, businesses are not going to innovate. We are not going to see serious climate action from the private sector. If one wants technology, not taxes, it is going to be left to government subsidies alone, and where do government subsidies come from, Conservative friends? They come from taxes. If one wants one's taxes to go up, then axe the tax.
1579 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/19/24 4:49:23 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in my speech, there is a comprehensive climate plan. It touches on many different areas. The price on pollution is responsible for a huge number of emission reductions when we look at the plan up to 2030, and it is responsible for between 23% and 30% of the overall plan. If we were to axe the tax, it would cost a lot to replace those significant emission reductions. That is if, on a threshold question, someone cared. If they do not care, then they should be honest about it and say they do not care. As to what we are doing otherwise, there are many different things. There are investments in public transit. There are investments in clean tech. There are rules on methane emissions. Yes, there are rules forthcoming, regulations that are being debated right now, around an emissions cap on oil and gas.
150 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/19/24 4:51:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, a recent report shows that the NDP-Liberals are going to hike their carbon tax by 23% on April 1, even though it does not work. Canada's environment commissioner says the NDP-Liberals are nowhere near on track to hit their emissions reduction targets and are relying on “overly optimistic assumptions, limited analysis of uncertainties and a lack of peer review.” In fact the NDP-Liberals do not even bother to measure if the carbon tax is working. That is because the NDP-Liberals are increasing their ineffective tax, instead of doing things like fixing Canada's broken and overtaxed electric grid or getting more public transit built. Gas prices are rising and Canadians cannot afford to drive or heat their homes. It is all because of a tax that does not work. This NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. It is going to be a cruel summer for Canadians because the NDP-Liberals are hiking the carbon tax on food, heat and groceries by a whopping 23% on April 1. Any summer road trips that struggling Canadians might be dreaming about will probably become completely unaffordable because gas prices are about to spike, thanks to the NDP-Liberal tax hikes. Experts say a recent increase in the cost of gas in the GTA might be only the beginning of price hikes at the pumps this summer, with some estimating that the Liberal-NDP tax hike will be part of the reason for a forecasted 20¢ a litre increase by July 1. Canadians deserve to be able to afford to live. They deserve that road trip. They do not deserve more NDP-Liberal taxes. It is time to axe the tax. If someone took $2,000 from someone else and gave them $1,500 back, they would not say thank you. They would say, “Call the cops.” However, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Canada's top budget watchdog, shows that is exactly what is happening to Canadians. The NDP-Liberals' sneaky carbon tax scam takes thousands of dollars from Canadians and only gives them a few hundred dollars back, all while increasing the cost of everything, food, fuel and more, and the NDP-Liberal government expects to be thanked for this. It gets worse. On April 1, the NDP-Liberals want to hike their tax by 23%. Canadians will not say thank you to the NDP-Liberals for taking their cash. They are going to give them the boot. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Canada's top budget watchdog, the average Alberta family will pay $2,466 for the Liberal-NDP carbon tax and only get $1,750 back. That means that the NDP-Liberal carbon tax will cost them $710 today, rising to a whopping $3,000 by 2030. Where does the Liberal-NDP Prime Minister expect struggling Albertans to find an extra $3,000 to pay for a tax that does not even work? Life has never been more expensive and people are struggling. Canadians are looking for relief, not more tax. This NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the average Ontario family will pay $1,363 for the NDP-Liberal carbon tax and only get $885 back. This means that the NDP-Liberal carbon tax will take nearly $500 from Ontarians this year, rising to a whopping $1,800 by 2030. Where does the NDP-Liberal Prime Minister expect that struggling Ontarians will find an extra $1,800 for a tax that does not even work? Under the NDP-Liberals, life has never been more expensive and people are struggling. The dream of owning a home has disappeared. Canadians are looking for relief, not more tax. This NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the average Nova Scotian family will pay $1,039 for the NDP-Liberal carbon tax and only get about $600 back. That means the NDP-Liberals take about $430 out of the pockets of people in that province today, rising to a whopping $1,500 by 2030. Where does the NDP-Liberal Prime Minister expect struggling Nova Scotians to find an extra $1,500 for a tax that does not even work? Under the NDP-Liberals, life has never been more expensive and people are struggling. Canadians are looking for relief, not more tax. This NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. A new report shows that the average family's grocery bills will go up another $700 this year alone. Canada's food price report estimates that the annual grocery bill for a family of four in Canada will hit a whopping $16,297 this year, an increase of over $700, but it gets worse. On April 1, the NDP-Liberals are going to raise their carbon tax, a tax on everything including food, by 23%. No one can afford that. That is why food bank usage is at record levels across Canada. This NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. A new report shows that a 600% increase in food bank usage has occurred within Canada's university students, but there is even more bad news for struggling students. At a time when Canadian students cannot even afford ramen noodles, NDP-Liberals are going to raise their carbon tax, the tax on everything including food, by a whopping 23%. The NDP-Liberals have made it completely unaffordable for today's Canadian university students to ever hope to afford a home of their own, and now they have the audacity to raise the carbon tax on everything by 23%. This insanity has to end. Canadian students deserve better than food bank ramen noodles and a carbon tax. This NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. Would members spend four minutes alone with Canada's Liberal Prime Minister? Probably not, but recently he said that if Canadians would spend four minutes alone with him, then they would understand how awesome his carbon tax on everything is. Canadians do not need quality time with the Liberal Prime Minister to understand how much the NDP-Liberal carbon tax costs them. That is because they cannot afford food, fuel or rent. They are using food banks. They are losing their homes. Now the NDP-Liberals are going to hike their carbon tax by 23% on April 1. No time alone with the Liberal Prime Minister will change the fact that the Parliamentary Budget Officer said that the NDP-Liberal carbon tax will cost some Canadians almost $3,000 a year. Canadians do not need time alone with the Prime Minister. They need tax relief. This NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. People say that we cannot make a silk purse out of a pig's ear, but the Liberals sure think we can. The NDP-Liberals have announced that they are going to do an expensive rebrand of their unpopular carbon tax and make Canadians pay for it, instead of axing it. Can members believe that? The NDP-Liberals know it is a terrible policy that is costing Canadians more. They know it does not work, and they know Canadians hate it. However, unlike the NDP-Liberals, Canadians cannot simply rebrand their rising bills away. The carbon tax is increasing the cost of the food they buy, the gas they put in their cars and the necessities they purchase at the store, and on April 1, the NDP-Liberals are going to hike that tax by 23%. Life has never been more expensive and people are struggling. They are looking for relief. The NDP-Liberal tax is not worth the cost. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax. After eight years of the Prime Minister, people are worse off than they were eight years ago. They are looking for hope, but the Prime Minister is looking to take more money from them while people are struggling to pay their bills. Instead of giving them that hope, the NDP-Liberals are giving them a tax hike. Their carbon tax hike is going to make everything cost more. That trip to the grocery store this spring will cost more. Filling up their car with gas on their way home from work will cost more. Keeping their house warm and the lights on will cost more. That is what the NDP-Liberals are asking Canadians for all the time: more. All the while, Canadians are getting less and less. I have news for the NDP-Liberals. Canadians do not have more to give. They do not have a little more. They do not have a bit more. They do not have any more. Canadians have had enough. They cannot afford the Prime Minister and they know he is not worth the cost, just like his costly tax, which it is time to axe. If members had to choose between paying for a Disney+ subscription or an NDP-Liberal carbon tax increase, what would they pick? Canada's Liberal finance minister had a big old fail on that front when she told Canadians who are struggling to make ends meet that they should cut that Disney+ subscription, even though she is increasing the NDP-Liberal carbon tax by a whopping 23% on April 1. Time and time again, the government has shown it has no clue how hard it is for regular people to pay for basic necessities like food, rent and fuel. Life is unaffordable and Canadians are tired of being told they have to give more and more to the NDP-Liberals and get less and less out of their lives. It is time to spike the hike and axe the tax.
1716 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/19/24 5:04:33 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canada is a cold, natural resource-based country that does not have major public transit options for many Canadians across the country. In fact, we do not even have an electric grid that works to plug electric cars in, so it is insane to increase a carbon tax that does not work, that does not meet Canada's emissions targets and that makes Canadians broke. It is time to axe the tax and spike the hike.
78 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border