Thank you very much, Chair.
Again, I would point out that this member continues to direct the chair in the NDP-Liberal coalition style and suggest that the confidence and supply agreement may be in jeopardy. That being said, I certainly believe in the relevance of talking about the carbon tax. Once again, I think I've made it very clear. Obviously, the NDP member is not listening clearly enough. Perhaps he could turn up his headset.
When we're talking about preventing versus reducing the likelihood, the importance that needs to be underscored here.... It's exceedingly relevant, despite his continued attempts at censorship. The exceedingly relevant point really is related to the harm that could potentially be created for Canadians with respect to preventing something, which is exceedingly strong language, rather than reducing the likelihood. Just because the member doesn't like me speaking and wishes to have me censored does not really make any relevant sense in the style of government that we have. No matter how much I don't like things that other people say, it is still their opportunity and their obligation, especially if it's on behalf of their constituents, to have the ability to say it. Therefore, I would suggest that any attempt at censorship, especially under the direction of the NDP member towards the Liberals in their costly coalition, would be a significant attempt to undermine the great democratic traditions that we have.
Therefore, Mr. Chair, I will return to prevention versus reducing the likelihood and the drastic effects that need to be underscored. In a vain and inappropriate attempt to prevent a pandemic, what we have come to now is a society that is in considerable jeopardy with respect to their home finances. Again, that carbon tax, which could be removed, is continuing to punish Canadians significantly. We know very clearly, as mentioned, that out of a thousand dollars put into a barrel of oil this particular winter for Atlantic Canadians, it will cost them an extra almost $250 to simply put that oil in their oil barrel, which is an essential part of living in the majority of Canada throughout the winter.
We also live in single-family dwellings that are often old, which creates significant problems when it relates to heating a home. It's less efficient. I think looking for those particular opportunities related to that would be helpful, but we also live rurally, because that's what we choose. We also know very clearly that to get places, it is essential to drive. When we look at the 16¢ per litre added to the cost of every litre of fuel put in a vehicle, which will purportedly increase to 61¢ if this costly coalition of NDP-Liberal government is not stopped, there will be an utter inability for Canadians to afford their lives. They will essentially be priced out of their lives.
I had the great fortune to be born here in Canada 55 years ago. I spent many of those years in service to the public. Never before have I heard the incredible numbers, the painstaking, heartbreaking stories, that all of us here.... I know that on this side of the House all of my colleagues hear the exact same stories from constituents, who call them on a regular basis: How am I going to afford to feed my family, keep a roof over my head and heat my dwelling in the wintertime? The heating, of course, adds to the already significant and dangerous financial situation that we find ourselves in as Canadians.
When we talk about relevance, that is particularly why it is very relevant, Mr. Chair. When we talk about the financial position that in a vain attempt to divide and distract Canadians.... Canadians ended up with a significant and dire financial position, with 40-year-high inflation and interest rates that, according to the Prime Minister, would never be high. People should live in a fantasyland with fairy dust and unicorns and buy whatever they choose.
We know that this has contributed significantly to the financial position in which Canadians are at the current time. I do believe there is significant relevance related to introducing the carbon tax argument on top of that, because it is a significant part of the negative financial implications of what has happened in Canada at the current time. We know very clearly what we hear from Canadians now. We hear from Canadians that they want no more carbon tax on what they have to purchase.
As we know, when you tax the farmer who grows the food and you tax the trucker who ships the food, then even more cost will be passed on to the consumer who has to buy the food. Otherwise, if they don't buy the food—