Madam Speaker, we are seeing higher inflation rates and higher costs of living in Canada and, frankly, right around the world as a large result of many factors, which include the war in Ukraine; global supply chain bottlenecks, in large part due to the pandemic; and global energy market uncertainty.
This is something our government is concerned with, and I can reassure my colleagues that we are working on solutions to support Canadians day in and day out. Canadians are facing the pressure when they reach for items at the grocery store and when they pull into a gas station. However, inflation is actually less severe here than it is among many of our peers. It was 7% here in August, while it was 8.3% in the United States, 9.9% in the United Kingdom, and 7.9%. in Germany. We recognize the challenges.
The opposition would like us to drop the GST on gasoline and get rid of our pollution pricing system. Quite frankly, this would be a terrible idea. It makes much more sense to support Canadians who need it the most with targeted measures, such as those included in our $12.1-billion affordability plan. Gas taxes represent only a small portion of the total price that Canadians pay at the pump, so cutting them would be ineffective in protecting consumers from powerful global market forces.
It is important to understand that these market forces are driving daily changes in gas prices that are often substantially greater than the proposed 5% tax cut. This means that any positive impact on the price of gas would be wiped out in a day. The government would also be in the uneasy, unfortunate position of having spent tens or hundreds of millions of dollars trying unsuccessfully to fight market forces over which it has little control.
Putting a price on pollution is the most effective and least costly means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is important to note that Canada's approach is flexible. Any province or territory could design a pricing system that meets its needs, as long as it meets the federal benchmark. The federal backstop only applies in jurisdictions that do not have a pricing mechanism that meets the federal benchmark. The federal fuel charge is part of this, and one thing is clear, it does not make life less affordable for the large majority of people.
In provinces that do not meet the federal benchmark and where the federal fuel charge has been implemented, approximately 90% of direct proceeds are being directly returned back to households. In 2022-23, these climate action incentive payments mean that a family of four would receive $745 in Ontario, $832 in Manitoba, $1,101 in Saskatchewan and $1,079 in Alberta. In addition, families in rural and small communities are eligible to receive an extra 10%.
The reality is that, as part of the climate action incentive payments, most households are getting back more in payments than they pay in increased costs from the federal carbon pollution pricing system. Also, dropping the federal fuel charge in these provinces would mean smaller climate action incentive payments going back to the individuals in those backstop provinces. It would mean less money in the pockets of many people, including those living in the member opposite's own riding.
