So V ote

Feb/6/24 7:21:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to join in the debate today around the price of food inflation; the report that came from the agriculture committee, which I am proud to sit on; and some of the ideas we have heard over the last little while about how increases in the cost of food have affected Canadians in their day-to-day lives. My friend from Battle River—Crowfoot just had a great point that he asked my colleague from Kenora about, and I asked this of Tyler McCann in committee today. I asked whether the point of a carbon tax, which the Liberals and NDP opine is the great resource they are going to use to lower emissions, was to change consumers' behaviour. Mr. McCann said yes, it is. We can go on Environment and Climate Change Canada's website, and see that the point of a carbon tax is to change people's behaviour based on an increasing price of a product. It just so happens to be a product we are talking about today, which is food. I said in committee that it is amazing that a government is now fighting its own policy. Liberals and New Democrats are scrambling over each other to say that the carbon tax has not worked, because it did not increase the price of food. It was really one of the first times in my life in public service that I have seen a government arguing that a policy did not work when it did. I see this in other areas of people's lives too. We see it in transportation, where mothers are having a harder time filling up a tank of gas to take their kids to hockey games, to ballet classes or to music lessons. In rural Canada, we have to drive. There is not public transportation service like there is in downtown Toronto, so people are making a choice about how many extra shifts they have to pick up to cover the next tank of gas. We see it with seniors, who are still in their homes, asking how many sweaters they are going to have to put on because they cannot afford to keep the heat up. We see it time and time again. The Liberal-NDP carbon tax is making people change their behaviours in Canada, because it has made everything so much more expensive across our country. We know it is working, because there was a little caucus revolt in the Liberal Party recently; Atlantic Canadian members, along with the Conservatives, who have called for a long time to axe the tax as part of our plan, said they had to exempt home heating. The proof is in the pudding. Why would the Liberal members in the Maritimes fight tooth and nail? It is because they are having political issues to get a carve-out from the carbon tax, since home heating is costing too much. It is almost like it is working, but the people within the Liberal Party and the NDP did not realize how much pain they were going to inflict on Canadians. There is no other solution to heat a 100,000-square-foot barn. Today, in Ottawa, I met with a dairy farmer from just outside Regina. He said his heating bill for the barn has increased and increased. I have a SaskEnergy bill from another farmer, a chicken farmer. For one month, their gas supply cost is $1,092. Their carbon tax, with the GST on top of it, is $1,071. They are almost paying more in taxes on a monthly bill, $20 less, than they are for the gas they are supplying to heat their building. Maybe I am giving them the benefit of the doubt, but I do not think the Liberals and the New Democrats realized how much this was going to hurt. From APAS, in Saskatchewan, Mr. Boxall was at our committee when we were talking about food prices. He said that, on the average farm in Saskatchewan, the carbon tax cost will be between $14,000 and $25,000. However, when it goes to $170 a tonne by 2030, Canada's Food Price Report for 2023 stated that a farm could pay $150,000 in carbon tax per year. We asked Mr. Boxall in committee how that was going to affect farms. He said that: It will have a huge impact—$150,000 on a 5,000-acre farm. It's unfathomable that we will get there on a carbon tax alone. It makes my skin crawl to think that's where we'll be, and then to be turned around and not recognized for the work that is done, ensuring that we have proper grasslands and that we have proper management of our farm soil. Farmers are the biggest stewards of the land in this country, and we care more about the environment than we ever get credit for. It really is going to be detrimental to Saskatchewan farmers. That says it all. This Liberal government continues to punish our farmers, the people who put food on our plate, without a second thought of what the effect is going to be. We talked to some witnesses today in the agriculture committee and one witness laid out three things that this government has done and wants to do that will affect food prices. Number one, he said, was the carbon tax. Number two was P2 packaging where the government wants to make sure that, in Canada, we cannot use plastics to ship fruit and vegetables, which the U.S.A. has already said it is not going to do, and so it is going to cut the supply of fruit and vegetables in our country. Number three is the fertilizer reduction targets. Those three things are what this witness said is going to inflate the cost of food exponentially year after year. This is from people who are on the ground from the fruit and vegetable growers in Ontario. So, are we not going to believe a carbon tax bill that we saw from Saskatchewan where they were paying almost as much in taxes as in gas supply? Are we not going to believe members from the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, APAS, who are on the ground tilling the soil and planting the seeds who have said that $150,000 for a 5,000-acre farm will destroy farms in Saskatchewan, because it will make them unsustainable, which will lower supplies again? Are we not going to believe a dairy farmer who says that it is going to cost more and more each year to heat their barn with this carbon tax? The PBO said that, by 2030, farmers will be paying $1 billion a year in carbon tax. My friend for Huron—Bruce, who has put this through on a private member's bill, talked about the GST and HST that we pay on the carbon tax, which is about $490 million a year. So, combined, the carbon tax and then the tax on the tax is going to be $1.5 billion automatically out of farmers' pockets, and people do not think that is going to have an effect on food prices. That is irrational. It is taking $1.5 billion out of farmers' pockets. How are we going to make that up? Two things will happen: one, consumers will see that on the till at the grocery store, and prices will increase because farmers have to make that up; or two, farmers go out of business, and no farms, no food. If we lower the food supply in Canada, that will also increase the food cost. Members can see, and I agree with my friend from Winnipeg, that either way, consumers in rural or urban Saskatchewan are going to have to pay more for food. At this point in time I would like to move an amendment, which will be seconded by the member for Battle River—Crowfoot. I move: That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “the 10th report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, presented on Tuesday, June 13, 2023, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food with instruction that it amend the same so as to: (a) take into consideration that Bill C-234, An Act to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, has been amended by the Senate in a way that will prevent farmers from getting a carbon tax carve-out for grain drying, barn heating and other farm operations, and that since the Parliamentary Budget Officer has made clear that this bill, in its original form, would save Canadian farmers $1 billion by 2030, reducing the cost of food for Canadian families currently struggling to afford groceries; and (b) recommend that the House adopt the motion rejecting the Senate amendments as soon as possible.

1516 words

All Topics

Feb/6/24 7:05:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to commend that member for his audition for cabinet because there was not an answer in that comment. He is prepping himself for question period already. I wish him luck with that. He has two years left to make that move. As a member of the agriculture committee, can he name one farmer he talked to, who has boots on the ground, planting, harvesting, dairy farming or poultry farming, who has come to him and said that carbon tax has helped their operation, that they are doing better, that it is a good thing that the Liberals implemented a carbon tax and that they cannot wait for it to go to $170 a tonne by 2030 to take $1 billion out of their pockets?

128 words

All Topics

Feb/6/24 7:02:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will give my colleague a bit of time as he is quite new here. Just because he repeats something louder does not make something true. Catherine McKenna learned that lesson the hard way. I would say that more than eight out of 10 Canadians suffer under the carbon tax and get less back. What is not being taken into account is the gas, the groceries and the home heating. There are so many times that the carbon tax hits Canadians again and again. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has already said that that is not true; six out of 10 Canadians are worse off from the carbon tax. I want to get back to what we had a conversation about when it came to the agriculture committee. I saw the smile on the member's face, but what he could not say was how many farmers, not farm associations, but people who actively farm, he has met with have told him that the carbon tax has helped their farm and that they are better off with the carbon tax in place under the Liberal-NDP policy.

188 words

All Topics

Feb/6/24 6:56:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as always, one has to be very careful with the Liberals when they talk about truths and untruths. What Dr. Charlebois said was that there has not been enough data collected to see exactly what the effect of the carbon tax is on food prices. He also said that he called for a pause on the carbon tax to lower food prices. Charlebois has said that; conveniently, the member omitted this. When one hears a story coming from the Liberals, it is always interesting to listen to the facts. Talking to Mr. McCann, I also asked if the point of a carbon tax is to increase the price so that consumers change their behaviour. He said that this is exactly what the Liberals say the point of a carbon tax is. The truth is that, when it comes to food inflation, food prices and the relationship with the carbon tax, it will come out in the wash that there is a correlation. When one talks to farmers and dairy farmers today, their highest input cost now is the carbon tax and the heating of their barns. If someone does not think that affects the price of what a farmer does, then they should maybe get out of downtown Winnipeg and go to a farm once their life.

219 words

All Topics

Nov/7/23 7:22:39 p.m.
Watch

I apologize for the comments I made, Madam Speaker.

9 words

Nov/7/23 7:22:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I apologize for saying that he cannot figure out math or for being unable to square the circle of the carbon tax—

25 words

Nov/7/23 7:20:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am glad that the member brought up the rebate. I talk about our climate policies all the time because in Saskatchewan, we have lowered our per capita emissions more than any other province in Canada has over the last five years, with carbon capture and sequestration and new technologies. The new technologies in farming have sequestered more carbon, and we are doing a wonderful job of ensuring that we have climate sustainability in the province of Saskatchewan. With respect to a smog day in Saskatchewan, that is how out of touch the member is. What a ridiculous comment that is. We are the land of blue skies, and we have a beautiful province. I would just like to say that the member is so incompetent. He says that people get $1,200 back, but with carbon tax 1 and carbon tax 2, the people of Saskatchewan pay $2,600 a year in carbon tax. Therefore, if he can tell me how $1,200 is more than $2,600, I would love it. I would love it if he could tell me how that math works out, but he is not very good at telling the truth in the chamber.

202 words

Context: House Hansard - 245 - Nov/2/23

Nov/7/23 7:12:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to join in and try to get some answers for the question I asked the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources last week. I am happy that the parliamentary secretary is here because he has said a few things tonight that I would really like to delve into. We will do just the facts if he is okay with that, and if he can manage to answer some things straightforwardly. One is that they have always said that the carbon tax, after eight long years of this NDP-Liberal government, was an environmental plan. They have also said that the carbon tax is revenue-neutral. They have also said that eight out of 10 Canadians get more money back, which the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said is not true. He said that 60% of Canadians get less money back after they pay the carbon tax. That is what the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said about their carbon tax plan. If the carbon tax was revenue-neutral and was an environmental plan, why was there the flip-flop last week? Why do they now say that they had to exempt home heating oil from the carbon tax as an affordability measure? Both of those statements cannot be true. It is impossible. The carbon tax cannot be revenue-neutral and eight of out of 10 Canadians, as they falsely claim, get more money back if they have to flip-flop with what they say is a nationwide program to say, with their NDP colleagues, that they need to do this as an affordability measure. I would love to hear from the parliamentary secretary if he can square the circle that this is an affordability measure now. It is actually impossible. Everyone across Canada knows this, and 3% of Canadians now get an exemption from the carbon tax, while 97% do not. They have said, all week, that this is a nationwide exemption. It is not true. Most of these exemptions are where the Prime Minister was getting decimated in the polls, in Atlantic Canada, and the Liberals are desperate to stop the bleeding in their polling numbers. This flip-flop had nothing to do with environmental science and everything to do with political science. I am excited to hear the answers to a few of these questions. While I am on the topic, he is talking about the carbon tax being an environmental policy, which we all know is not true, as it is a tax policy, because, today, the environment commissioner said that, with their carbon tax as their flagship policy, they will not meet one environmental target they have made. They will not make their emissions target by 2030. His good friend, the member for Whitby, said that Canadians will feel pain because of this carbon tax. They were exactly right. They felt the pain with zero environmental gain, and two million people in this country line up at a food bank every month. That is their record. I would love to see how the carbon tax can be an environmental plan when it is actually a tax plan, which is revenue-neutral, but they had to flip-flop to make sure it is now an affordability measure. Could he please explain that to Canadians because I cannot?

554 words

Context: House Hansard - 243 - Oct/31/23

Nov/2/23 1:31:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to join in the debate today. In Saskatchewan, in 2021, total GHG emissions were 67.1 million tonnes. Saskatchewan's GHG emission intensity dropped 18% from 2005 to 2021 because of innovations like carbon capture and sequestration. We have stored over five million tonnes of carbon in carbon capture over the last five years. My question for the hon. member is this. Seeing that Premier Moe has come out and said that Saskatchewan residents are not being treated fairly, obviously the expression “a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian” is not true for the Liberals anymore. What is her response to Premier Moe's statement that he will not collect carbon tax anymore, and to the fact that Saskatchewan has lowered emissions per capita more than any other province over the last five years?

143 words

Oct/31/23 3:07:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, after eight long years, a desperate Prime Minister in free fall has finally admitted that his NDP-Liberal carbon tax punishes some Canadians more than others. The Prime Minister announced his election platform recently. He said that if one voted Liberal, one would increase taxes on gas, groceries and home heating after the next election. Canadians know that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. In Saskatchewan, it gets pretty cold outside. We use 90% natural gas to heat our homes. It is greener and cleaner, but we do not get the exemption. Will the NDP-Liberal government finally listen to our leader and axe the tax for all Canadians?

113 words

Jun/1/23 4:11:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, first and foremost, I want to congratulate Danielle Smith and the UCP on their victory over the NDP in Alberta a couple of nights ago. I do not know what kind of party would have a leader lead them after two devastating losses, but at least the member for Burnaby South has some company now, as Rachel Notley has lost two elections as well. That is what the New Democrats do. They try to divide and separate Canadians. People who are running businesses and making extra money could hire another person to go to work. That is why the NDP continues to fail and is becoming more and more irrelevant across Canada. The party should just stand for “no damn point anymore”.

126 words

Jun/1/23 4:10:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I believe the member does not know all Canadians. Our leader has given examples of when this has happened at food banks. It is an admonishment of the government and its junior partners, which hold it up sometimes. Lots of times the Bloc will vote with the Liberals. It is quite disturbing to me that they vote with the Liberals. It is also disturbing that Bloc members sit in the House and try to break up our country every day, but they get to sit here. We will keep on talking about our policies and platform , which will move all Canadians forward, and they can talk about whatever they want.

112 words

Jun/1/23 4:08:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is quite sad that the Liberals can only brag about lowering emissions during a time when they locked Canadians down and they literally could not drive. Talking about the jobs they have created, they are not even at or near where they were in 2017-18, because before that, they stripped jobs out of the western oil and gas sector. They lost 100,000 jobs in 2017-18 in the oil and gas sector alone. If they want to talk about when the economy was thriving, they should figure out the economy of Canada. All of the provinces should be involved in the economy. They should not just hit one economy over the head again and again with poor policies that lose jobs in that sector and then think they are growing the economy. They should look at it as a whole-of-Canada approach and try to make sure that all Canadians can go to work.

160 words

Jun/1/23 3:57:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to join in the debate on our opposition motion today, calling for the scrapping of the first carbon tax and scrapping the second carbon tax as well to put more money back into the pockets of hard-working Canadians. I want to talk about the current state of affairs in our country. I got a disturbing text from someone I have known for a long time about how he sees what is happening in our country right now. He said, “This country is basically parts of the Titanic sliding into the abyss of the Atlantic. Five years ago, we would not recognize the country we have today. I shudder to think what we will think of the country that we will become in 2028.” This is from a hard-working gentleman who has worked his whole life, and created a good life for his friends and family. He sees this country as continuously going in the wrong direction. He wonders when people in this chamber are actually going to stand up for Canadians and talk from a passionate point of view of what hard-working, everyday Canadians see, which is our country going in the direction it is going. I am going to try and do that a bit today in the vein of our motion, and talk about taxes and what the tax is really trying to accomplish. The first carbon tax that was implemented after the 2015 campaign was supposed to reduce emissions across our country. It was supposed to be an environmental policy. The problem with that is it has had no environmental effects on our country. Over the last eight years, the government has never hit an environmental target with its carbon tax or any of its other environmental policies. When the Liberals flew around on a junket to COP and they were all eating caviar, it actually came out that Canada is the 58th country out of 63 countries for environmental targets. The Liberals never talk about that. Let us talk about someone who is a hard-working Saskatchewanian. They are looking at their government that keeps asking them to pay more and more because it is going to be good for the environment eventually. This person sees there are no results. They then start to question whether this actually is an environmental policy at all or if it just a tax-and-grab, and the government just wanted to fill its coffers with more hard-earned dollars. A government has never actually earned a dollar. The only way the government gets money is by taking it from someone who earned it in the first place, like through work or investment. The government gets it through taxing the hard-working people. The government does not earn anything itself. It takes and then it gives back with the other hand. That is the other argument on the carbon tax that our Liberal friends and NDP socialist friends put forward, which is saying it is revenue neutral. They have been saying this for years. The Liberals and the NDP have been saying it is revenue neutral. I have never in my life seen a government program run on a revenue-neutral basis. Canadians never get back what they put in when they give to the government. It goes to the government, it goes to the department, it goes through many different hands and then out the other end comes much less than what Canadians gave to the government in the first place. The Parliamentary Budget Officer came out and said it has been saying this since 2015. Before that, I remember that Premier Wall said there is no such thing as a revenue-neutral government program, and he was right. The Parliamentary Budget Officer came out and said there is no way eight of 10 Canadians are getting back more from the carbon tax than they are paying. It is not revenue neutral. It has had none of the desired environmental effects that it was supposed to have by making Canadians pay more for everything. Then the Liberals say it is a market mechanism. The NDP members are okay. They just want to take more money from people who have earned it. Socialists always believe the government can spend money better than the person who earned it anyway. We will never feel that way. Some Liberals are saying it is a market mechanism and they will put in policies that will make people act differently. In my province, where I come from, it is very hard to act differently when planting in fields or harvesting. There are limited options for harvesters, and many of them will continue to run on fossil fuels. We cannot implement a government policy that would make that process of planting, seeding and harvesting run differently, because we have to use fuel in the machines. Maybe a generation from now, there might be the capacity for electric combines and tractors. I would like to see that technology, if it ever happens, but it is very far away. So for a government to implement a policy, which it knows would adversely affect the agriculture sector, adversely affect the oil and gas sector, because there are no other technological options right now, is, quite frankly, dishonest. The government cannot say that this is going to be a fair tax, because it does hit provinces in our country differently. For example, the carbon tax 2 that we have talked about in the last couple of days is going to cost Saskatchewan people $1,117 net for a family. If we add carbon tax 1 and carbon tax 2 on what a Saskatchewan family is going to have to pay, it will be $2,840 more this year alone. A lot of people may say, “What's $2,800?”, but to some families that is grocery bills and new shoes for their kids. A lot of families could use that extra $2,800. These are not families who are not trying to be environmentally friendly. In Saskatchewan and Regina—Lewvan, people have to heat their homes when it comes to wintertime as it is pretty cold and in July, it gets pretty hot and so people have to cool off their homes. There are no options. When a government comes forward and says that it is going to change the behaviour of Canadians with this policy, there are just some behaviours that we are going to have to continue to hold onto, such as driving the kids to hockey or school. Rural Saskatchewan is a big place, and there are not many options other than to drive. We cannot get an Uber in rural Saskatchewan. There is no bus service. We need a vehicle and we need to drive. This is why we stand and talk about the carbon tax and lay out some of the arguments, which my fellow Liberals and NDP members will throw back at me. This is why some of the people I represent feel a little jaded when it comes to this government's policies. They feel, over the last eight years, that they have really been left behind in western Canada. It is getting tougher and tougher for people to see anything left from a paycheque at the end of the month; heck, even halfway through the month some people run out of their paycheque. A lot of people have probably been to the lobby day on the Hill when the food banks across Canada were here. I had an opportunity to talk to the food bank CEO from Regina, and some of the numbers are staggering. They call them “points of service” when people come in to get food. In Regina, last year, there were 120,375 points of service, which is a lot of people coming to get food in a city the size of Regina. This year, there were 171,451, which is a number, but these are people and these are families. That is a 42% increase. When we hear about the budget being so good, that we have never had it so good and that Canada is at the top of the G7 in numbers for debt-to-GDP ratio, it does not really sink home. A lot of people are asking: If the country is in such good shape and if the country has so much money, why is there not more money in the pockets of Canadians? Why do they not have more money to make it to the end of the month if the government is doing so well? I think that is a question that my Liberal colleagues and their junior partners in the NDP cannot answer. They stand up day in and day out, such as the finance minister, talking about how good it is in Canada and how everyone should be happy. Except that one in five Canadians are skipping meals. There are 1.5 million people using the food bank every month. Food bank usage in Regina has gone up 42%. There are students who are literally sleeping on couches because they cannot afford rent. That does not sound like a country that is doing very well. So, when we say that we should scrap the carbon tax 1 and the carbon tax 2, it is on behalf of our constituents that we rise up and talk about these issues and why we think they deserve to keep more of their hard-earned money. At the end of the day, if the policy is not working, it is literally the definition of insanity to keep on increasing it, doing the same thing and getting the same result.

1631 words

Jun/1/23 3:35:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, being an old hockey guy, I always appreciate the fourth line grinder doing their role and doing what they have to do to make sure they are part of a team, and I appreciate that member's ability to stand on his feet to talk about nothing for 20 minutes. It is fantastic, and I think he has a certain amount of skill at that. He has found his role on his team, and I do not begrudge him that, because he has that kind of talent. I do have a simple question. I know the member talks about our platforms from the last couple campaigns a lot. The Liberal platform promised not to raise the carbon tax to more than $50 a tonne, ever. I am wondering how he goes back to his constituents and rights that ship when he made that promise to them while door knocking. I would also like to hear an answer on that. I appreciate his fourth line talent.

167 words

Context: House Hansard - 202 - May/30/23

Jun/1/23 12:54:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I join with my colleague, whom I work with on the agriculture committee, in wishing everyone a happy Filipino Heritage Month. We have a large Filipino community in Regina, and I say hi to all my friends back home. I have a simple question for my hon. colleague. Could she tell me how much carbon taxes 1 and 2 will reduce emissions in Canada? Is there a number that the Liberals have? They have not met many emissions reduction targets yet, so what will carbon taxes 1 and 2 do? What is the number in terms of how much emissions will be reduced?

105 words

Context: House Hansard - 185 - Apr/26/23

May/30/23 3:03:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, carbon tax 1 is inflating the price of groceries, making it more expensive for families to put food on their tables. Food bank use is at record highs and one in five Canadians are skipping meals. The average farm of 5,000 acres will pay up to $150,000 for the first failed carbon tax. Carbon tax 2 is only going to make things that much worse. Families cannot afford food. When will this jet-setting, out-of-touch Prime Minister finally realize the more he goes woke, the faster Canadians are going broke?

96 words

Context: House Hansard - 185 - Apr/26/23

Apr/26/23 7:23:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I wish the member had read from his prepared notes, because everything he said was untrue. First, I wish he would find a piece of literature that said I ran on a carbon tax in my riding. That would be interesting to see. Second, if the member agrees with his environment minister, then he agrees that people are going to pay more in the carbon tax than they are going to get back, because that is what the environment minister said. It is nice that he finally agrees with the Conservatives. Third, most people understand that we have to do something about climate change, but the hilarious part is the Liberals have never met a target they have made. They are 58th in the world in reducing emissions. That is a fact. That is from the recent COP. The fact that they think this carbon tax scam is actually going to lower emissions is false, and they should stop spreading misinformation to Canadians.

165 words