I understand. That said, my Conservative colleague raised the issue of the carbon tax. To assess the impact of this tax, we have to assess not only the cost, but also the benefits to society of protecting our environment and reducing financial costs, among other things.
If we assess the financial cost and the benefits in the case of the carbon tax, wouldn't it be appropriate, in the case of an increase in the inclusion rate, to assess not only the costs—people will indeed pay more taxes—but also the positive effect on society? That way, we would really assess the impact of this measure.
It's not as if the money is going to be given to the government and disappear. It's going to be spent on something. The government has set out its intention in the budget with respect to new spending and programs, such as housing.
Wouldn't it be appropriate to evaluate that?