Thank you very much for the question, Mr. Lehoux.
With respect to the first part of your question, we have to bear in mind that the carbon tax is applied to natural gas and propane used for drying grain. At this point, farmers have no alternative but to use fossil fuels. That's why we continue to support the passage of the private member's Bill C-234. I think there's acknowledgement from this government that the objective intended with that particular policy is not being achieved.
On your second point with respect to developing this rebate program that was established, ultimately the intention of the rebate was to return 100% of the funds collected from Canadian farmers and ranchers back to Canadian farmers and ranchers. What we've seen is that, while all of that money may be going out the door, the rebate is not equitable in terms of its approach to distribution. Some of our directors have quantified what they're going to be getting back in the form of a rebate. In some cases, what they'll be getting back in the form of a rebate is still below 40% of what they ultimately paid in carbon taxes.
I think there's acknowledgement from this government that the tax that's being applied is not fair and that it's not ultimately reaching its intended objective. That's why our sector continues to support the passage of Bill C-234 as the most efficient way to ensure that Canadian grain farmers, who have no alternative but to use natural gas and propane to dry their grain, do so at no additional cost, especially when you consider all of the unprecedented costs that they are currently facing.