44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 9, 2024 10:00AM
- Apr/9/24 7:28:01 p.m.
- Watch
The question is on the motion.
If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
51 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:28:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we request a recorded vote, please.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:28:42 p.m.
- Watch
Pursuant to Standing Order 93, the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, April 10, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to follow up on a question I asked the government in December about the carbon tax and Bill C-234. Notably, the question I asked got over 13 and a half million views on Instagram; clearly, many Canadians are very interested in the issue. It also might have had something to do with the hearty laughter from the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, who was sitting behind me at the time.
The issue is with Bill C-234, which we continue to champion today in this House. Conservatives are fighting for farmers to be exempt from the carbon tax.
We believe in axing the tax completely. However, in this Parliament, in order to make some incremental progress, we have put forward a bill that has gained the support of a majority of the House of Commons, seeking to exempt farmers from the carbon tax.
This bill was on the verge of passing in the Senate when the government started to lean into their supposedly independent senators, making personal phone calls to try to pressure them to change their vote. The bill is now back in the House of Commons, and Conservatives are pushing to pass it in its original form, to exempt our hard-working farmers from the carbon tax.
Applying the carbon tax to farmers does not make any sense even if one believes in the carbon tax in general. The carbon tax is designed to be a Pigovian tax, that is, a tax on something that is believed to generate a negative externality in order to try to discourage that behaviour. That is the theory behind the carbon tax.
It seeks to make gasoline and airplane travel more expensive in the hopes that people will drive less, fly less, etc. That is the theory of the government's carbon tax. However, on what basis is it applied to our farmers?
Does the government hope that people will farm less if it makes farming more expensive? Does it think that farmers should do the essential work of farming less in response to the Pigovian tax that they are applying? It does not make any sense.
Farming is not an activity we want to discourage. Farming is an activity we should be encouraging. We should be making it easier for people to go into farming, to work in farming, to continue with this critical livelihood, feeding people across the country wherever they live.
Why is the government applying a punitive tax on farmers? What possible rational policy objective could taxing farmers in this way have? It just does not make any sense.
To be clear, Conservatives oppose the carbon tax in general. We will axe the tax after the carbon tax election. At a minimum, the Liberals should understand that, even in theory, the carbon tax makes no sense. Even on its own justification, the tax makes no sense when applied to farmers. That is why Conservatives have championed and will continue to champion the passage of Bill C-234, to push the government to pass the bill in its original form.
We have also called on the government to meet with the premiers; along with the Canadian public, they overwhelmingly oppose the carbon tax. Liberals are afraid to gather and meet with the premiers to have a carbon tax conference. I am sure that, if they did, they would clearly hear a call from the premiers to axe the carbon tax on farmers and on all Canadians.
585 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:33:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is nice to be back in adjournment debate with my friend from Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
The member spoke about pressure on senators. I think it is relevant to the debate to talk about what pressure on senators actually made the news, with respect to the failed former Conservative leader from Regina—Qu'Appelle's bullying tactics towards some non-Conservative senators, which actually resulted in their feeling extremely unsafe. People were showing up at their private residence. That kind of bully politics is unbecoming of any member. It should not be part of how we come to decisions, how we debate in the House and how we put forward good ideas.
I would say that the only senators who are partisan in the other place are Conservative senators. The Liberals do not have senators at our caucus meetings. There are independent senators. There are senators who have their own views. That is the way it should work. For the member to suggest that pressure was put on any senators, other than the pressure that was very clearly documented in the media, from the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle and other Conservatives, was totally unbecoming of the offices they hold. They should have apologized for that.
On the topic of farmers and agriculture, farmers are the backbone of our country. Their work is essential. It is difficult, especially with climate change heavily impacting their livelihood. The number one risk and the number one impact that farmers are experiencing is our changing climate and severe weather. Drought, floods, very focused precipitation and wildfires are having a devastating impact on the agriculture sector, with people having to evacuate their homes and communities in the summer, during wildfire season. Last year, I think 1.5 million acres of our forests burned; actually it was much more than that, but I do not remember the total number off the top of my head. Farmers face climate change's harsh realities every single day, whether it is through drought, wildfires, floods or invasive species. They are all becoming more prevalent.
Our government supports agriculture, farmers and their families, and the practice of farming. We subsidize innovations. We ensure that farmers are made whole. It goes without saying that they are the breadbasket of Canada. It is absolutely essential that we make sure farmers can continue their important work. I meet with my local farmers in Milton on a frequent basis, and I am very grateful for all of the work they do.
That is why 97% of on-farm fuels are exempt from carbon pricing altogether. It is also worth mentioning that farmers in Quebec and British Columbia are not subject to the federal backstop of carbon pricing, because those provinces have a plan to fight climate change and lower their emissions. It is up to the provinces of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Alberta and Ontario, if they do not want to continue to have Canada carbon rebates go to their constituents, or if they do not want to have the federal price on pollution, to come up with their own plan.
In the last federal election, the last time my colleague from Alberta went to the doors, he ran on a commitment to price carbon. With Erin O'Toole as their leader, the Conservatives ran on a promise to have a carbon pricing scheme. It was called “The more you burn, the more you earn”, because every dollar would get deposited in some kind of green bank account. However, they did not win the last election. In a hypothetical alternate universe, if the Conservatives had won the last election, farmers would be paying the price on pollution.
It is clear to me why they made such a big deal about the April 1 hike, and that is because in Alberta, Danielle Smith increased the price of gas by 4¢ on April 1. That was not a rebatable increase; it was just an increase in provincial tax, and it had an impact on the cost of living in Alberta. However, we do not hear about that from the Conservative Alberta MPs.
693 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:37:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member began with a ridiculous and irrelevant attack on the Conservative House leader. I want to be very clear about what happened. The Conservative House leader made a post on social media with the names and photos of senators, in terms of how they voted, with their publicly available office phone numbers, and invited people who disagreed with the public votes of senators to contact their office and share their views.
I would just say that if any citizen has a concern or an opinion about how an elected official voted, they should have the ability to phone their office and share their perspective. If anyone disagrees with anything I say or do in the House, they can call my office at 780-467-4944. I am not afraid of accountability. No minister, no member of the government nor a senator should be afraid of people calling their publicly available office number in order to share their perspective.
What farmers want and need in this country is the ability to grow their food without the punitive carbon tax. That is why the government should axe the tax.
190 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:38:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Canadians do not need to hear it from me. They can hear it directly from the senators in question. Three independent senators said they were bullied by the Conservative leader in the Senate, in the red chamber, after a member from their group attempted to put off debate on a controversial bill. Police and the Senate had also investigated the matter, and the Conservative leader in the Senate did concede that he got a little angry over the matter.
The Conservatives can stand over there and justify that behaviour if they would like, but there are senators who did not go home that weekend. They stayed in a hotel because they feared for their safety due to the bullying of the Conservative Senate leader. That is unbecoming of the office they hold. Certainly, there is lots of time for debate, but instructing people to harass senators, or any other elected or non-elected official, is wrong.
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
163 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:39:31 p.m.
- Watch
I would remind the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan that there are no more opportunities for him to reply.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Order. If the hon. members want to continue having their conversation, they should take it outside.
I would also ask members to stick to the subject matter they brought before the House, as opposed to trying to expand into other debates and issues.
77 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:40:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when I last spoke in the House on this particular issue about the carbon tax being imposed on Canadians, including to a young farmer trying to raise a family, the response I got from the minister was far from satisfactory. As long as the Liberals decide to keep the carbon tax in place and raise it every year, there is nothing they can say. Canadians will not be satisfied until the government finally gets rid of it.
Conservatives will not stop until we axe the tax for good. That is why we have been debating a new Conservative motion in the House today on the carbon tax. Maybe the members from all the other parties are tired of talking about it, but they need to continue to hear it because the issue is not going away. More and more people are doing their best and working hard every day, and they can barely afford to live anymore. Instead of easing that burden, the NDP-Liberal coalition went ahead with its out-of-touch plan to raise the carbon tax by another 23%.
Before the Liberals did that on April 1, we heard from a growing number of Canadians telling them not to do that. Apparently, they were not paying attention and they ignored all this. I want to at least highlight the impact the carbon tax is having back home. Hopefully it will help the government to understand the damage it is doing.
The mayor of Shaunavon wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister and broke it down for him. He offered a straightforward explanation of the problem created for a rural community like this one.
This is what Mayor Bennett had to say about the carbon tax increase that impacts communities like ours all across the country. He wrote, “the Town of Shaunavon's total utility costs for public buildings on an average monthly basis during the winter months amount to... about $38,477.18. It is highlighted that a total of 14% or $5,267.91 of this total is paid toward the Carbon Tax. This Carbon Tax is set to increase by 23% as of April 1, 2024, amounting to a new total of approximately $6,500 per month”, which is an an annual impact of $78,000.”
To understand this in proportion, that alone would require a town such as Shaunavon to increase its municipal taxes by 8% or more to generate enough to cover the federally implemented carbon tax.
The mayor continues, “We bring this to your attention out of concern towards the Federal Government's lack of transparency around the Carbon Tax and that personal tax rebates do not accurately reflect the actual costs of this program.”
Unlike the federal government, municipalities do not have the ability to borrow and spend like the feds do. The mayor of Swift Current also released an open letter to the Prime Minister. He included this information in his quote: “Two percent...of our municipal taxes will be required this year to pay the carbon tax—this 2% comprises more than half of the property tax increase we requested from our ratepayers in 2024. We estimate that over $400,000.00 in carbon charges will be paid by the City of Swift Current to the federal Government of Canada this year alone.”
The Liberals have the nerve to tell the public that they are not increasing the tax burden, but that is misleading. What is really going on is that their federal policy forces taxes to go up at the lower levels. How is that fair to anyone? I shared two examples, but it happens in a lot of other places. The carbon tax adds to the cost of everything, and some of the worst damage is done indirectly. Along with municipalities, small businesses have not yet received a rebate of $2.5 billion in carbon tax revenue. The government has repeatedly said it will return that money, but the delay has continued.
There are so many ways that the carbon tax is harming families, communities and businesses. That is why it is not good enough for them to pretend that a rebate will solve everything. It does not cover all the costs for everyone. A strong majority of Canadians oppose it. I am going to ask the question on Canadians' minds: Why will the NDP-Liberals not axe the tax, or at least pause it? What excuse do they have left?
755 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:44:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let me first correct my colleague. As the Supreme Court has recognized, the carbon price is not a tax. It is a regulatory charge that is essential to reducing the pollution that is causing climate change and all the money is returned to Canadians. In fact, eight out of 10 households receive more money back through the Canada carbon rebate than they pay toward the fuel charge, with lower- and middle-income households receiving the most. They benefit the most.
Claims that the carbon price is increasing the cost of living are false. It has been widely refuted by hundreds of economists across this country. The math has been done by those who conduct the research on a regular and frequent basis and the fuel charge is a slow and steady increase, which does not affect inflation to a large degree and also does not increase the cost of living.
I have been reflecting on why the Conservatives have taken this approach on April 1. I started considering who they are working with. The fact is that, on April 1, Danielle Smith increased the price of fuel in Alberta by four cents. That was more than the increase. They talk about a 23% increase. That 23% increase on just the very small carbon price on gasoline added up to three cents. There is a three-cent increase in the price of a litre of gasoline, but Danielle Smith, the Premier of Alberta, increased it by four cents. The difference between those two increases is that the four-cent increase did not come with a rebate, whereas the price on pollution with the Canada carbon rebate is sent back to Canadians. It is an incentive. It is a proven strategy and it works. It is lowering our emissions in Canada.
However, my colleague is not from Alberta, so who might he then be working for? There are a couple of options, I suppose. One is that big oil and gas posted record profits last year. The vast majority of the price of fuel goes to profits for big oil and gas executives, which is worth considering, but there have also been calls in Saskatchewan, the home province of my colleague across the way, to reduce its provincial tax, which is in excess of 15¢ per litre. The Saskatchewan government has refused to, despite the fact that other provinces have recognized that there is an affordability crisis and their governments ought to do what they can to lower the cost of fuel.
One might say that the federal government just increased the cost of fuel with the price on pollution going up on April 1. That is true, but the rebate went up as well. It is a fully rebated increase on the price of fuel, but the provincial excise tax in Saskatchewan is the highest in the country. It does not come with a rebate and Saskatchewan has refused to cut it. It is also possible that Conservative members are kind of creating this Conservative cover-up campaign to make it look like gas is expensive just because of the price on pollution, whereas there are multiple factors. There is corporate greed from big oil and gas. There are provincial excise taxes that are not rebated and a lot of other global factors, including climate change, which has an impact on the price of fuel.
Climate change is the number one cause of the increase in the cost of living with respect to groceries. It is another well-documented thing by the 200-plus economists from right across the country who the member for Carleton, the leader of the Conservatives, called “so-called experts”. That is unfair. Those experts are experts. They work at Canadian universities and conduct that research, and that is the evidence, the facts and the science, the pure mathematics, that the government relies on when making decisions.
Carbon pricing is a proven strategy to lower emissions. It is working. Since 2018, our emissions are down 8%.
I would remind Canadian voters that Conservatives ran on a plan to price pollution in the 2021 election under the auspices of Erin O'Toole, the former Conservative leader. The member across the way ran on a promise to price pollution. He went door to door with that campaign commitment and platform. Since then, the Conservatives have decided that carbon pollution and climate change is not an issue. However, it is an issue and it requires all of us to work on it.
757 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:48:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have a couple of things I need to clarify for the member. The only people I work for are the residents of southwestern Saskatchewan. Those are the only people I work for. Also, I have never campaigned on a carbon tax. Regardless of what the former leader of the Conservative Party may have tried to do, I never ran on that promise. I never have and I never will. That is also reflected in what the people of southwest Saskatchewan want.
I have some more data that works. The Premier of Saskatchewan said:
When the latest consumer price index came out, Saskatchewan was at 1.7%, down from the 2% projected target that the Bank of Canada hit and one full point lower than the Canadian average. Statistics Canada said specifically that this was due to a decision the Saskatchewan government made to remove the carbon tax from home heating. You can imagine what would happen to our CPI nationwide if we were to pause, first of all, and then remove the consumer carbon tax on Canadians.
Right there we can see the benefits of removing the carbon tax for all Canadians.
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:49:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I said previously, carbon pollution pricing systems across Canada are designed to limit impacts on farmers, on the cost of living, on the cost of food, and they have been doing that. However, when premiers either refuse to cut their very high provincial excise tax, which is still 15% in the province of Saskatchewan, or actually increase it, as the Premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, did, they are creating inflation within their provinces. Perhaps the inflation in Saskatchewan, as the member opposite just said, has not gone up by as much. The Premier of Saskatchewan has not increased the price of gas; it was already more expensive than in other provinces.
This is a journey that we take together. Carbon pollution and climate change are inescapable realities, and we need to help Canadians lower their emissions as well as navigate this affordability challenge. Climate change is upon us. The wildfire season has already started, and it is only April. Last year, 2023, was the hottest year on record.
I am hoping the Conservatives will come up with some kind of plan to lower our emissions, to fight climate change and to make sure that our grandkids have a planet to live on.
205 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 7:50:50 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes not being present to raise during Adjournment Proceedings the matter for which notice has been given, the notice is deemed withdrawn.
The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 7:51 p.m.)
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
