Bill C-38

Canadian Fuel Affordability Act

An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act (extension of the federal fuel excise tax relief)

This enactment amends the Excise Tax Act to extend the temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax until January 31, 2027 and to temporarily set the excise tax rates on fuels to 50% of the regular rates for the period beginning on February 1, 2027 and ending on March 31, 2027.

Canadian Fuel Affordability Act

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if the member had listened to my speech, I encouraged every measure as welcome. Every measure that helps Canadians, Canadian families, Canadian workers or Canadian business is welcome. We Conservatives believe this bill is a half measure that would not give Canadian families and businesses the long-term relief they need. Only after months of Conservative pressure is the government now extending this temporary measure. We will continue to pressure the government until it gives Canadians real long-term relief and takes all the taxes off fuel.

One thing I would like to say is that we will welcome any ideas, and if they are willing to accept our ideas, they are also more than welcome to accept them to make—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Questions and comments.

The hon. member for Yellowhead.

[William Stevenson, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the hon. member's statement, and I agreed with everything he had to say there. My question to him would be this. Does he think it would be better if the Liberals actually had a long-term plan rather than making short-term, interim adjustments and things that are not going to necessarily last for the economy and for Canadian citizens?

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my hon. colleague. We are looking for a permanent solution for the problems that have been created in the last 11 years of Liberal government rule. We need to provide a better relief structure to Canadians and eliminate the industrial carbon tax, eliminate unnecessary taxes on business, cut red tape, do the needful things that help Canadians and bring Canada and Canadians to a point where they can live with good affordability, they can buy a house and they can have meat at the food table every single day.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the last question was a bit surprising. The government has dealt with and continues to deal with the issue of affordability. We understand it, and we continue to look at ways we can improve upon it. Today it is Bill C-38, dealing with the excise tax on gasoline. I am glad the Conservatives are supporting it, but we have also brought in a number of different measures, such as a tax break for the middle class, by which 20-plus million Canadians benefited, and a series of programs to address the issue of affordability for seniors who need dental work and for children in schools who need meals. However, the Conservative Party opposes those.

Can the member explain to the House, and through the House to his constituents, why the Conservatives do not support those aspects of affordability, feeding children in schools and providing dental services for low-income seniors?

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are always in for measures that are going to help Canadians. I agree with my colleague that Canadians on fixed incomes are especially hard hit by taxes on fuel. No Canadian should have to make the choice between heating or eating, nor between rent or dinner. We are going to continue to pressure the government to remove all the federal tax on gas and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027 to save Canadians up to 25¢ per litre.

Further to your question, whenever you are going to bring any pragmatic idea that is going to improve the health of Canadians in any aspect, we will support those measures, and we will continue to work for Canadians in this Parliament and beyond so they can have a better life in Canada.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

I will just remind the hon. member to address his comments through the Chair and not otherwise.

Resuming debate.

The hon. member for Québec Centre.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to have the opportunity to speak this evening to highlight the Government of Canada's efforts to make life more affordable. This very important piece of legislation, Bill C-38, is part of those efforts.

As we know, Canadians are having to cope with an increasingly complex and unpredictable world and, unfortunately, this world is also, in many respects, more dangerous and more expensive.

In view of this, the Canadian government continues to focus on what it can control: building a stronger Canadian economy, diversifying our foreign trade, forging more alliances with countries that share our values, ensuring responsible fiscal management and supporting Canadians in managing the cost of living.

Allow me to give a very concrete example. For several months now, shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz has been disrupted. This has led to soaring oil prices, a sharp rise in gas prices and increased costs for other essential goods.

Did the Canadian government, or Canada, start this war in Iran? Of course not.

Has the Canadian government taken action, and should it take action, to reduce costs for Canadians? Of course it has, and it should.

Global conflicts and the persistent, significant disruptions to these supply chains stemming from the Middle East or elsewhere, including the conflict in Ukraine, are not things the Government of Canada can stop or even control.

However, what we can do here in Canada and in the House of Commons, and what we are already doing, is help Canadians who are bearing the brunt of these conflicts through no fault of their own.

The federal fuel excise tax has been suspended since April 20. Earlier in September, the Minister of Finance and National Revenue announced that the Canadian government had decided to extend the temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax until January 31, 2027, and then to apply a rate equal to 50% of the regular excise tax rate from February 1 to March 31, 2027. This will help reduce daily expenses for Canadians, particularly those related to road transportation and the food, agriculture, housing, construction, and delivery sectors.

The suspension of this tax is expected to save Canadians up to about $5.75 on a 50-litre tank of gas. These are real savings for families. It also means lower costs for truckers and businesses. This measure is expected to provide more than $2.4 billion in relief to Canadians in 2026–27.

By lowering the price of gas and diesel at the pump, the Government of Canada is taking real action to support all those who are currently facing very real challenges.

I want to point out that this temporary suspension of the federal excise tax builds on other measures that have already been announced and put in place. I will give an example. Even before the conflict in the Strait of Hormuz began, economies, businesses and workers in many countries, including Canada, were thrown into uncertainty by a historic increase in tariffs.

Is Canada responsible for the upheaval in global trade and the resulting rise in the cost of essential goods? Of course not.

Should the Government of Canada take action and has it done so? Of course it should, and it has.

To help Canadian families make ends meet, earlier this year, for example, we launched the new Canada groceries and essentials benefit. This new benefit is based on the GST tax credit and provides increased support to two million low- and modest-income Canadians. That is just the beginning. Starting in July of this year, middle- and lower-income Canadians received higher quarterly payments. The benefit will be increased by 25% for another five years and will add approximately $8.6 billion in additional support to families that are struggling to make ends meet, including middle-income and modest-income families.

In total, a family of four could receive up to $1,890 this year and then about $1,400 a year for the next four years. A single person could receive up to $950 this year and then about $700 a year for the next four years. This is real support. It is concrete and tangible. It is helping people buy groceries, pay bills and cover essentials.

That is not all. We also cut taxes for 22 million Canadians by lowering the tax rate for the first personal income tax bracket from 15% to 14%. In 2026, that reflects savings of $420 per person and $840 for a two-income family. We also eliminated the goods and services tax, or GST, for first-time homebuyers of new homes valued up to $1 million and reduced it for homes valued between $1 million and $1.5 million.

In addition, we made permanent Canada's national school food program, which is helping 400,000 children and their families access high-quality meals at home and at school, saving the parents of two children an average of $800 a year on groceries.

We have also taken very real action to improve the banking system's fairness and affordability for Canadians, especially those struggling to make ends meet. Since March, for example, consumers can no longer be charged more than $10 if their personal bank account balance is too low to cover a payment. In addition, non-sufficient fund fees cannot be applied if the account overdraft is less than $10.

This year, we are also going to begin automating the payment of federal benefits. This will help up to 5.5 million low-income Canadians get the benefits they need and are entitled to receive.

In conclusion, the Government of Canada is focusing on the things it can control, like building a stronger, more resilient Canadian economy, while at the same time helping Canadians who struggle in their daily lives under cost-of-living pressures caused by the many severe global disruptions that we are familiar with.

For all of these reasons, I sincerely ask all members of the House to vote in favour of the bill.

[William Stevenson, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I did not catch all of the member opposite's comments, but he talked about a lot of the programs the Liberals were spending money on. Would he not agree that it is better for the individual taxpayer, the consumer out there, to actually take less from the consumer and not tax them like the government does with this excise tax? Would it not be better to just not have the money taken away from them to move it around versus spending the money on all the other programs the Liberals have?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, we are doing two things. First, we reduced income tax for 22 million Canadians, which is quite a large number. It has been, unfortunately, opposed by the Conservatives. The second thing we are doing is helping those who struggle more than richer Canadians. The member has heard my list of measures. For example, the national school food program is helping thousands, in fact more than 10,000 children in my region, who otherwise would struggle to go to school with a full belly and therefore would also struggle to learn what they need to learn to become good citizens.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague astutely pointed out that the measure we are discussing this evening is tied to the current situation. He also talked about the measures the government has put in place to help people cope with the cost of living, even though we do not agree on everything.

However, there is one matter the Liberal government often overlooks, namely, the issue of seniors. Those who have suffered the most in the wake of the pandemic are seniors aged 65 to 74, who continue to suffer from inequity and whose purchasing power has never increased.

Since my colleague started off by saying that the government should help people when they are going through tough times or facing difficult economic conditions, does he agree with me that increasing old age security for people aged 65 to 74 would be a good measure?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful for such an excellent question. I want to briefly mention three points.

First, as my colleague is aware, OAS has been increased for people over the age of 75 in light of the very clear evidence that seniors over the age of 75 not only have greater needs, but also lower incomes, and that older women, among others, live in more precarious circumstances for a variety of reasons that are well understood.

Second, I want to mention the Canadian dental care plan, which helps approximately 25,000 people in his riding, including several thousand seniors. This represents savings of about $800 a year. I encourage my colleague—whose leader, unfortunately, opposes the Canadian dental care plan—to talk about it at length with the seniors in his riding when he sees them. I am sure he meets with them regularly.

The third point is automatic benefits. As I was saying, there are nearly 5.5 million Canadians whose tax returns will be processed automatically, which will maximize the chances for these seniors, for the most part, to receive the benefits they need.

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I remember very well that my colleague has visited me several times in my riding in the past.

We are talking about lowering gasoline prices by 10¢ per litre and diesel prices by four cents per litre, not to mention getting rid of the carbon tax. My colleague has also talked about the many programs that our government has put in place since the beginning.

Which program does he think is helping his constituents the most? Which one has the biggest impact on families and people in his region?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am always very pleased to hear and even see my colleague from Acadie—Bathurst. As my colleague knows, and as I have seen myself, his constituents really like him. They see him as an excellent MP who is on the ground and always there to advocate for his riding. It is a particularly important riding in northern New Brunswick. The Acadian community needs him, and he is always there to support it, despite all the challenges of serving a region that is a little farther from the major centres.

Speaking of the most important programs, I know that roughly 20,000 families in his riding receive the Canada child benefit. It reduces child poverty in his riding by 50%. He has been there to support that measure from the start.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House to represent the great residents of Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay. Their words and their feedback will always guide me in this chamber, as they do in this debate on Bill C-38.

For rural and remote communities like the one I represent, driving is a fact of life. It is not a choice. When I checked GasBuddy before coming to the House today, I found that regular gas was priced as high as $2.09 per litre and diesel was $2.95 a litre. Whether someone lives in Tulameen, Princeton, Keremeos, Cawston, Osoyoos, Rock Creek, Midway, Greenwood, Grand Forks, Christina Lake or Castlegar, a basic fact of life is that they drive, which means that almost everyone is paying high prices at the pump.

The journey I just described across my riding is 360 kilometres. Unlike the urban regions of the country that many Liberal colleagues across from me represent, there is no SkyTrain. There is no subway, no LimeBike and no e-scooter that my constituents can turn to and travel across our riding in.

Transportation costs are also affected by high gas prices. These costs then transfer to nearly every item on store shelves. Keeping prices down at the pump, as we have been speaking about for the past year, means keeping prices down on essential items at Walmart, Canadian Tire and Safeway. This is true not just for my constituents, but for anyone across the country who lives in a remote or rural region, from island communities to our Arctic territories.

This is why, since the spring, my colleagues and I on this side of the House have been arguing that at a time of higher gas prices, the result of both conflict abroad and policy decisions at home, it was of the utmost importance for all members of Parliament to act to reduce the price of gas where we can do so. No one is pretending it can or should magically fall to zero, but providing tax relief at the pump is the least we can do when so many Canadians are in need.

It is no coincidence that the lack of an affordable life is the number one thing I heard from my constituents this summer. I am guessing everyone else heard the same thing while they were in their ridings this summer. Of course, there were other issues, including health care, tariffs and wildfires. In my region, as many know, wildfires hit Summerland and the Penticton area tremendously. This was obviously what people talked about, but gas prices were very important because they have skyrocketed 25.7%, while overall energy costs have surged 16%. This pushed transportation costs up 7% while grocery prices rose 3%.

A recent poll found that 63% of Canadians oppose the Liberals bringing back the fuel excise tax, including 43% who strongly oppose it. This includes 72% of seniors, 68% of women and 61% of those aged 35 to 54. Opposition crosses every region of the country: 71% in Manitoba and Saskatchewan; 64% in British Columbia, Alberta and Atlantic Canada; 62% in Ontario; and 60% in Quebec. Everyone is opposed to this tax, in other words. There is no reason the House cannot deliver for them.

When the Liberals offered what they called summer gas tax relief, it was clear that what they were offering was not only insufficient, but very confusing. When I asked government members about this policy, they made no commitment to it beyond the summer, and the member for Delta also made it sound like the policy was meant to help people explore our home province and go camping.

While I did have the opportunity to see much of my beautiful province this summer, it was not cheap to do so. In fact, I know several British Columbians who cancelled road trips and hunting expeditions this summer because the cost was too much and the price of gas was too high.

Those costs will only rise as the snow starts to fall. That is why my colleagues and I were clear on the need for an extension to the gas tax relief so it could go further and for longer than just the summer until Labour Day. The bill before us today is because of those efforts, stopping what would have been a punishing tax hike at the pumps just this month.

The Liberals' rosy rhetoric has not matched what Canadians are seeing in their wallets or on their bank statements. They cannot afford higher taxes. Thanks to Conservatives keeping up the fight for affordability, Canadians will keep more money in their pockets when they are filling up at the gas station this month, but we can go further. We can improve the bill before us.

Bill C-38, as it is currently written, would suspend the fuel tax until January 31, 2027. Half the tax would return on February 1 and the full tax on April 1. Is the Liberal government predicting that Canadians will not be challenged by the costs at the grocery store, by their heating bills or by the price of the pump by April 1? Is everything going to change by then? I do not believe the Liberals have invented that kind of crystal ball, so why time-limit the relief people need? Why reimpose taxes they are currently recognizing as unnecessary?

The Liberals have filled their treasury with unnecessary taxes and fees from Canadians' pockets. They have wasted far more tax dollars than we need in order to fund health care, road repairs or national defence properly. Canadians should not have to pay more for Liberal waste.

The Minister of Finance himself said that truckers, farmers, home builders and delivery drivers benefit from fuel tax relief. Would they not benefit more if the government extended this relief to Canada next year, as we are calling for? Would they not benefit by permanently eliminating some of the government's gas taxes at the pump, as Conservatives are calling for? Of course, the only reason to allow gas taxes to go higher is that the government would choose to prioritize raising taxes instead of providing limited relief.

Removing all federal taxes on gas and diesel, including the fuel excise tax, is what we are calling for. Eliminating costly fuel taxes like the fuel standard tax permanently would help keep prices lower. The Liberal government does not need more of Canadians' gas tax dollars for wasteful boutique projects like Alto rail, which will cost Canadians $60 billion to $90 billion in its life cycle. Instead of forcing families of four in my community to spend between $8,000 and $9,000 on eastern Canadian priorities, they want to see their gas tax dollars spent on efficient local infrastructure, like a secondary route for the South Okanagan to Kelowna, which we have been calling for for years.

Conservatives support the Liberals' half measures like those in Bill C-38 if it means Canadians can get some savings, but we will be pushing for more. The legislation has the potential to provide more relief for longer, but only if we amend it. I hope all colleagues in the House can work together to do just that.