Madam Speaker, it would be remiss of me to go on at all, but it is great to know that they are attentive, at least.
Putting a price on pollution is both effective and an essential part of any serious response to the global climate change. That is why all parties in the House, all 338 members who were out knocking doors in the campaign in 2021, committed to a price on pollution in one way, shape or form. We all agreed at that time that climate change was worth fighting, and that there were monetary, economic instruments, such as cap and trade or carbon pricing, that actually do the job.
Back in 2018, Ontario had just that. The Province of Ontario used cap and trade. It was a very effective way of combatting climate change and ensuring that our emissions are not unfettered. I strongly believe that pollution should not be free. We pay for our garbage when the town or city comes to pick it up. We pay for sewage when we flush things down the toilet. We should also be accountable for what we put into the environment and into the atmosphere. The more we burn, contrary to what the Conservatives ran on in the last election, the more we do not earn.
The more we burn, the more accountable we should be. Accountability and personal responsibility is foundational to Conservative thinking. I am surprised they spent so much railing against something that Stephen Harper, Preston Manning and so many others have proposed as very good ways to ensure we are fighting climate change from an economic perspective.
We have seen carbon pollution pricing work all over the world. In Europe, emissions are declining across industries thanks to carbon pricing. It has been working in Canada as well. We have seen emissions come down thanks to our carbon price. We have also seen it work in British Columbia for over a decade.
I would also point out that the Liberals brought that forward in 2008, at a time when many members of the Conservative Party were in that caucus. They thought it was a good idea to price carbon back in 2008. Climate change is worse in 2023, so I do not know why they have changed their mind and are now proposing that we get rid of a price on pollution when it has been so effective in British Columbia and Quebec. In Quebec, of course, it is cap and trade, which is another effective way to do it.
However, the federal approach to pricing carbon pollution is designed with a focus on affordability. The goal is to reduce pollution, not to raise any government revenue. It does not do that. That is why we direct all proceeds from the federal system to remain in the province or the territory where it came from, and is used to keep life more affordable and to take climate action.
I actually have the PBO report open on my desk, on my laptop. I was looking at which quintiles, which groups of Canadians, might pay a little more as a result of carbon pricing. It is always the wealthiest Canadians that tend to pay a little more as a result of having an extra car or a larger car, having a larger home to heat or having a more carbon-intensive lifestyle. Perhaps they tend to travel more often on airplanes. None of those things are bad. It is not a bad thing to have a larger vehicle or a larger home, it just means that people are probably going to burn more fuel and would have to be more accountable.
I will say it again, accountability and personal responsibility are foundational to Conservative thinking. I think it is very strange that the Conservatives are railing against this.
Wherever federal fuel charge proceeds are returned directly to households, eight out of 10 families actually get more back through the climate action incentive payments than they face in increased costs.
I would also just mention that, in the Toronto Sun recently, there was an article in which the Parliamentary Budget Officer expressed quite a lot of dismay at the misuse and mischaracterization of the report. The Parliamentary Budget Officer does really important work. Perhaps I will read a quote about the Parliamentary Budget Officer. It says, “Yves Giroux said the report has to be put into context alongside the costs of all other climate policies, including doing nothing.”
The cost of doing nothing is actually the most expensive idea, and that is pretty much what the Conservatives have been proposing, asking us why we do not just do nothing, get rid of the price on pollution and do nothing, which is the way they would do it if they were in charge.
Canadians do not want us to do nothing on climate change. They want us to stand up and make sure that we are fighting climate change and demonstrating to the world that fighting climate change and growing our economy go hand in hand.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer said, “I am concerned at times about looking at just one aspect of the report...looking at the big picture...is highly preferable”. Doing nothing would be extremely costly. He indicated that carbon pricing, as I said, is an effective way to lower emissions and that we should be looking at the full report, not just selecting little bits and pieces, and saying for the highest quintile, it is going to cost them money.
The wealthiest Canadians tend to drive the biggest cars. The Ford F-150, not the electric version, was the best-selling vehicle in Canada over the last couple of years. Canadians tend to drive larger vehicles for lots of reasons. That is not a sin, but there is a reason to be accountable. That is what I think people ought to understand. It is all about accountability and personal responsibility.
In 2023, quarterly climate action incentive payments for a family of four are $386 in Alberta, $264 in Manitoba, $244 in Ontario and $340 in Saskatchewan, so we multiply those by four. These payments also go to households in the Atlantic provinces, where a family of four will receive $328 in Newfoundland and Labrador, a little shy of $250 in Nova Scotia and $240 in Prince Edward Island. Families in rural and smaller communities are also eligible to receive a 10% increase. It is also worth pointing out that they are tax-free, and families can do whatever they would like with those funds.
Pricing carbon pollution, as well as returning the proceeds to Canadian families and businesses, is an effective and affordable way to combat climate change while supporting the sustainability of Canadian communities. By returning those proceeds from federal carbon pollution pricing to businesses and industries through decarbonization projects and clean technologies, the Government of Canada is also stimulating that green step forward towards innovation and a green and clean future through business. That includes over $2.5 billion to small- and medium-sized businesses through those types of grants.
Canadians want to take advantage of the significant economic opportunities in the low-carbon economy, and that includes through clean fuels. Countries and businesses around the world are making a major shift to lower- and non-emitting fuels, and Canada is in a powerful position to be the producer of those fuels in the future. I am glad to see that we are taking steps in those types of innovations going forward. We expect those regulations will pay dividends, and the impacts are going to be positive on the overall ecosystem in Canada.
I want to close by once again thanking all the brave firefighters across the country, who are doing really hard and extraordinary work. They are risking their lives for Canadians, as they save them and protect homes from the destruction and danger of these horrible wildfires in so many provinces and territories across our country.