Finance committee  Yes. I would also point out that the government had a recess at Christmas. If there was such great urgency, it would have been perfectly acceptable to extend the sitting of Parliament and to have debate on the bill, not to demand that you roll everything together now and essentially frame it as “If you don't support this bill, then you don't care about Canadians.”

Finance committee  I think Canadians definitely should demand and expect to have a budget. When a government wants to spend money, it's very simple: You come forward, explain what your plan is, and make your case for it. They're not doing that. They are using the pandemic as an excuse to not present a budget.

Finance committee  I think it's mostly all been said here. I think that perhaps what's most alarming about asking for the increase in the debt ceiling and the planned $100-billion spending when we don't know what it's going to go to is that it has been explicitly stated as being for after the pandemic.

Finance committee  Well, first of all, when it comes to stimulus, the minister, as she herself has pointed out, has preloaded the stimulus if Canadians want to spend money. If Canadians are feeling good coming out at the other end of this pandemic, obviously they will want to travel. They will want to spend.

Finance committee  Certainly.

Finance committee  That's great.

Finance committee  Yes. Yes. Well, you say that he's speaking “on behalf of” the CTF, we don't actually have a corporate view on those issues. We're not an environmental organization. I personally—

Finance committee  I absolutely agree that man-made climate change is real and it is a serious concern.

Finance committee  That was 12 years ago, so with respect—

Finance committee  I would actually disagree that they “recently” abandoned them. They abandoned them very early on, when they came into office. They promised a balanced budget. They didn't deliver it, and then the debt-to-GDP ratio started to creep up, so it's not a new phenomenon. On the minister's insistence on fiscal guardrails, she says she's going to impose them, but she doesn't want to do it until later on.

Finance committee  It's certainly one of the biggest challenges of our time. I don't dispute the reality of climate change. I don't have strong views on most of the rest of that bill. The main focus we have, the main concern we have, is with the debt ceiling. I would note that there is an easier way to get these measures passed: produce a federal budget.

Finance committee  Sure. Thank you for the question. Look, it's troubling, to say the least. This would be troubling even if we did have a budget. We don't. I think the very fact that the minister has committed to spend money without knowing what to spend it on is getting the entire budgetary process backwards.

Finance committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the committee, of course, for having me appear again today. For those who are unfamiliar with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, we're a national non-profit, non-partisan group. We have 235,000 supporters across the country. Our advocacy is really focused on three general areas: lower taxes, less government waste, and accountable and transparent government.

Environment committee  I've actually heard contradictory things today. I've heard, on the one hand, that we need the subsidy to stimulate demand, but I've also heard that demand is so high that people can't find them on the lots. I have heard that the life cycle, based on the total cost of the vehicle, is comparable to combustion engines.

Environment committee  Sure. Again, I don't have any issue with the objective of this policy. My point is this: If you have people who are in a position to buy a $55,000 vehicle, are you actually changing many minds by giving them $5,000 of taxpayer money? It's great that they buy a cleaner vehicle, and it's great that there are health benefits for all of us, but I'm simply questioning whether or not they've analyzed the marginal change in those purchases, based on the policy.