Debates of Sept. 27th, 2022

Presence in Gallery

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I wish to draw the attention of members to the presence in the gallery of the Hon. Ashni K. Singh, Senior Minister in the Office of the President with Responsibility for Finance of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I would also draw the attention of members to the presence in the gallery of Mr. David Beasley, Executive Director of the World Food Programme.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

We have a point of order.

The hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, something very unfortunate happened during question period. The Minister of Public Safety twisted my words, thereby misleading the House on an extremely sensitive issue. I think it is important to choose our words carefully—

[Some hon. members]

Debate.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, may I speak? I was talking about smugglers, and he insinuated that I had said they were criminals—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Order.

The hon. member can continue in two seconds. I think everyone is leaving, and they are talking as they leave. We will wait two seconds.

Now that it is quiet, I would ask the member for Lac‑Saint‑Jean to please continue.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a sensitive issue, as you know. I am asking the minister to apologize for twisting my words. I was talking about criminal human smugglers who exploit migrants trying to cross the border. He said that I said that criminals were crossing the border. Those are two entirely different things regarding a sensitive issue. I want him to apologize because he twisted my words and it is unacceptable.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Sometimes in the House we do not always understand what is being said or what is being asked. I would remind members to pay attention to what they are hearing and saying. This is not really a point of order. This is a matter of debate on what was said. I will ask all members to be careful what they say.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Today in question period, the official opposition cited a March 2022 report by the Parliamentary Budget Officer that shows that the carbon tax will be a net cost to Canadian families. I am seeking unanimous—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I am afraid it is pretty clear that is debate and I will have to shut that one down.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, there is a matter arising out of question period. Today the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, who is also the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, falsely stated that all on-farm fuel is carbon tax exempt. He knows that is blatantly false—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I am afraid I am going to have to cut that off as well. That is more of a debate. I am here to ensure that procedure is followed. What is answered and what is asked is, unfortunately, out of the purview of the Speaker.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge has four minutes and 30 seconds remaining in his debate.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that was a riveting question period.

We all know that Canadians, along with citizens of countries across the world, are dealing with inflationary pressures. Our government has acted since day one, in 2015, to ensure we work hard to strengthen our middle class and obviously assist those who wish to join the middle class.

In this Parliament, we have put forward a number of measures to assist Canadians from coast to coast to coast. It is great to see that the opposition will be joining and supporting us in the GST tax credit, which would assist nearly 12 million Canadians, which is great news, and would allow for the doubling up of the GST credit for the next six months. The payments would be received prior to the end of the year, which would obviously be a big help for families as we enter the fall and Christmas period.

We are putting forward the rental benefit, a $500 top-up, which would assist 1.8 million Canadians, those who really need the assistance the most, such as seniors, people on fixed incomes and lower income families. We need to be there for those Canadians. That is what this country is about, and that is what our government has been about since day one, ensuring that Canadians have access to the resources they need to provide for their families while we continue to grow our economy and generate the investments we need to create jobs for our citizens. We have done this since day one, in complete contrast to what I would call the anemic record of the prior government, which we defeated in 2015.

I would also like to comment on the dental benefits, which I touched upon very briefly before question period started. As members of Parliament, we deal with cases consistently. There are those cases that really leave an impact on how we could help, not only for today, but also for the future. We are creating a dental benefit for Canadians, especially for seniors and lower income folks, so they do not have to make a choice about whether they can go to the dentist to get that dental work done, to pay $500, $1,000 or even more out of pocket to get assistance. We are acting on that.

First, we would introduce the Canada dental benefits for kids under 12 who do not have a proper insurance coverage. This is obviously means tested, which is important and something I believe in. It would then be introduced for seniors and families. That is what I would define as responsible and prudent leadership from any government, and specifically from our government.

Going back to my original comment, I ran for office as an economist. I ran as somebody who worked in the global financial markets for over 20 years, and I ran as someone who grew up in a small town in northern British Columbia to immigrant parents who worked hard, saved, sacrificed and did the right thing. They were provided with the opportunity to push their kids forward to not only create a better environment and brighter future for their children but also for them to have the opportunity to do so. That is why I ran for office.

Our government has continued to do that since day one, whether it was the redesign of the Canada child benefit or the implementation of the Canada workers benefit, which which we would see by the end of this year up to $2,400 more in the pockets of hard-working Canadians. This is, again, means tested, and has helped literally three million Canadians since the inception of our changes. We have done that.

We have cut the small business tax rate for our businesses across the country, from 11% to 9%, providing the necessary support during the COVID-19 pandemic. Those supports were essential for so many businesses, for so many employers and for so many Canadians and Canadian workers. That is what our government has done since day one.

Our fiscal position remains strong as we continue to deal with the issues of the day. Affordability is something that I know all my constituents are dealing with. I ask the opposition parties to join us in pushing this legislation through quickly and efficiently to ensure that Canadians get the help they need, especially folks on fixed incomes, seniors and working families.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.

Before asking my colleague a question, I do wish to recognize the passing of a friend from high school and former constituent, Daniel Letendre. I wish his family all the best, and may eternal light shine upon him.

I heard my colleague speaking about small business tax cuts and things of that nature. Would he agree that, especially over the last seven years, we have seen incrementalism come in when we are dealing with paycheques? There is 1.5% on income tax and a little more on CPP, and then there is a little more on EI and a little more on the carbon tax. If we look at take-home pay over the last 20 years, it has slowly dwindled, and house prices have doubled under the government.

How can we simply say that we are doing something for small business or for the ordinary Canadian when, incrementally, the situation has gotten way worse, especially with inflation and rises in these types of expenses?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I must admit that the family of the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo and mine have known each other for over 50 years, since they immigrated from southern Italy to Canada, and I consider the member a great friend.

I will say that our government has focused on returning money to the pockets of Canadians. We have introduced two tax cuts directly aimed at middle-class Canadians, one in 2015 with the raising of the basic personal amount. We will continue to return money into the pockets of hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast, including the residents in the member's riding.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his speech, my colleague addressed the issue of dental care. What amazes me is that they are trying to see this as a solution for contributing to finances, including seniors. Does my colleague not agree that before getting their teeth taken care of, people need to eat?

The government is still refusing to give seniors what they need, in other words, help seniors who receive old age security at 65. There should not be two classes of seniors. The $110-a-month increase for seniors aged 75 and up is discriminatory and unfair. It is ageist.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Shefford for her question.

From our government's election in 2015 to today, we have helped seniors.

We have been there for seniors since day one, and we will continue to be there for seniors. The10% increase in old age security was introduced, with $800 more in the pockets of seniors, to over 3.3 million seniors across Canada, which is a great benefit. We know that seniors who are living in poverty tend to do so later on in their years, which is why we put in a measure for seniors when they hit 75. We have also increased the guaranteed income supplement for seniors by 10%, and we returned the age of eligibility for old age security and GIS back to 65, as the Conservatives had raised it to 67, which was very important for many seniors in my riding and in all members' ridings.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I find it disturbing that the Conservatives raise questions about the carbon tax today. This is a time when people on the eastern seaboard of the country are suffering from one of the worst examples of a crisis caused by climate change, which climate scientists are absolutely ad idem on that we are going to see more of because we are not dealing with the fundamental causes of the climate crisis. This is the exact wrong time to be reducing the effect of any mechanism that may help in reducing our carbon emissions.

These are my questions to my colleague: Would he not agree that, in order for a carbon pricing mechanism to be most effective, we should have to make sure that it is actually effective in helping to reduce the consumption of carbon? Is that, in fact, happening with the federal carbon tax? Is it reducing carbon emissions in this country?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we have introduced a suite of measures to ensure that, by 2050, we will be net zero. Those measures include putting a price on pollution and innovation, which we are seeing in many industries across the board, such as the auto industry as well as companies like ArcelorMittal and other steel companies where they will be switching from carbon-intensive energy sources to less carbon-intensive energy sources. That is the way we will get down to net zero by 2050.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I want to note off the top that I will be splitting my time this afternoon with the member for Peterborough—Kawartha.

We know that costs are continuing to soar in this country and affordability is becoming a greater stress for more and more Canadians. Families are feeling the pressures of inflation, which continues to be fanned by the Liberal government’s deficit spending, and while inflation takes a bite out of the paycheques of hard-working Canadians, the Liberal government’s tax hikes only dive deeper into their pockets.

Canadians are feeling the squeeze, and if the Liberal government really wanted to, it could take meaningful action to alleviate those pressures. It could cap government spending, cut red tape and scrap its tax increases.

Today’s motion, put forward by our Conservative leader, calls on the government to abandon its plan to triple the carbon tax, and it would make a real difference in the lives of Canadians. Canadians, and certainly my constituents in Battlefords—Lloydminster, cannot afford the tripling of the carbon tax. The Liberal government has burdened Canadians with a carbon tax as it is, a carbon tax that is ineffective and costly.

The Liberals' so-called price on pollution has failed to deliver any meaningful results. Since the Liberal government has imposed the carbon tax on Canadians, it has failed to meet every climate target that it has set for itself. Doubling down on this failed policy, or I should say “tripling down”, will continue to do nothing for the environment. However, the government's failed carbon tax policy has not been without any consequences. Its failure has been at the expense of Canadians.

The carbon tax is making everything more expensive, and the government's plan to hike the carbon tax further could not come at a worse time, as the cost of living continues to skyrocket in this country. Small businesses, which have been doing everything they can to get by during the last few years of uncertainty, cannot afford these added costs, and workers, families and seniors who are struggling to put food on the table or to heat their homes cannot afford another tax hike.

The carbon tax hurts those who can afford it the least, the most. The cost of basic necessities should not be out of reach for Canadians. We know that the carbon tax is making food more expensive. It is making home heating more expensive. Driving to work, appointments or school is more expensive, and that is a direct result of the government’s failed policies.

These costs are even greater for rural Canadians, such as those who are in my riding of in Battlefords—Lloydminster. Every single Canadian living in rural and remote communities are punished more by the federal carbon tax, and that is a reality that really cannot and should not be ignored. The simple fact is that rural Canadians have to drive to get groceries, to get to work and to drive to go to school. Even for medical appointments, they have to drive. There are no other alternatives. There are ridings that do not even have public transit, and often times their drive is a greater distance. Sometimes constituents of mine are driving one to two hours just to see their doctor to have a prescription refilled.

However, we have to realize that at the same time, the cost of shipping foods and goods into our communities also goes up with this failed carbon tax, and as the fall cold air moves in, we cannot forget the reality of our Canadian seasons. Come winter, home heating is not a luxury. It is a necessity. It is a necessity that far too many Canadians are struggling to pay for, and unfortunately, it is going to be harder if the government follows through on its plan to triple the carbon tax.

We know members on that side of the House are always very quick to get up in this place to repeat their rhetoric that most Canadians get more back more than they pay in taxes. That is far from the truth. Liberal math fails to give a complete picture of the impact of their carbon tax. Canadians know this. My constituents know this, and the Parliamentary Budget Officer also knows it.

The PBO has clearly stated that under the government's carbon tax plan, most households in Saskatchewan, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario will suffer a net loss. These are real families and real businesses that are being punished with this carbon tax. Many of my constituents cannot afford the carbon tax at its current rate, much less if it were tripled.

While the government might operate on endless deficits and expect taxpayers and future taxpayers to pick up the bill, that does not work for Canadians. I hear directly from constituents all the time about the impact of the carbon tax on their families and on their businesses.

For example, Rob, a welder in my riding, shared some energy bills with me. One bill shows that for just 800 dollars' worth of gas delivered, his business paid $450 for the Liberal carbon tax. In another month, he paid over $600 in carbon taxes on just under $1,100 of gas delivered. The carbon tax is 25% of his overall natural gas bill. That is a significant expense for small businesses. What is also worth noting is that those bills were before the latest carbon tax hike in the spring. That was when the carbon tax rate was only $40 a tonne, and 25% of his energy bills went to the carbon tax.

Let us not forget that the carbon tax is hiking the cost of materials and operations. The Liberals are creating a very risky business environment. Red tape is making it harder and harder to do business in this country, and higher taxes are hiking business costs. We need to ensure that businesses have the ability to succeed.

We have not even talked about our farmers yet. Farmers are some of the hardest hit by the ineffective and costly Liberal carbon tax. They are paying tens of thousands of dollars on the failed carbon tax. We heard in question period earlier that farmers get rebated what they pay, but that is not true. They may receive a drop in the bucket of what they pay in carbon taxes.

We need our Canadian farmers. The world needs our Canadian farmers. Food insecurity is an increasing concern globally, and Canadian farmers can be an important part of the solution.

It is not feasible for our farmers to continue to operate if they are overrun with costs. The carbon tax and nonsensical policies like the Liberal plan to cap fertilizer use hurt farm operations and jeopardize food security globally, as I said, and also here at home. I believe the tripling of the carbon tax would be absolutely detrimental to our farmers and farm families.

We need the Liberal government to get serious about affordability. The Liberals cannot keep spending money and driving up inflation. They need to get their hands out of the pockets of hard-working Canadians. Every single person, no matter their background and no matter where they are from, should have the opportunity to succeed in this great country. Canadians should be confident that when they work hard, they will have enough money in their pocket to put food on their table, put gas in their car and put a roof over their head, and still have something left over for their family's own priorities.

If the Prime Minister and his Liberal government truly cared about Canadians who are struggling to make ends meet, they would give Canadians a break. He would support this motion and cancel his ineffective and costly carbon tax increase.