House of Commons Hansard #105 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was inflation.
Jagmeet Singh NDP Burnaby South, BC
Mr. Speaker, Autumn Peltier launched this petition to get this government to address the water crisis in indigenous communities, because this government broke its promise.
Tomorrow is the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. How can the government defend its record when so many indigenous communities still do not have access to clean drinking water?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his very important question.
I believe that reconciliation is a key issue for Canada, and I am sure that all members in the House feel the same way. It is not just a political and social issue, but a moral issue as well.
Our government is working wholeheartedly to invest a great deal in reconciliation. We recognize that there is more work to do, and we will keep working on it.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing all parties should agree on, it is the fact that Canadians should have enough to eat.
Unfortunately, four in five families have had to cut their food budget because of inflation. The government could have chosen to help Canadians directly. Instead, it committed to tripling the Liberal carbon tax as of April 1. That will have a direct impact on food. Canadians are already struggling as it is.
Could the Liberal government make the right decision and cancel this Liberal carbon tax hike, which is three times too high?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, we understand that the cost of living and affordability are major concerns for Canadian families. That is why we are going ahead with inflation relief payments.
I am very pleased that, ultimately, the Conservatives agree with us and have announced that they support our plan. It is now time for the Conservatives to do another political U-turn and support the other elements of our plan.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to political U-turns, we are looking at the masters. They formed government seven years ago, and boy, have they broken election promises.
They said the country would run three small deficits. That is one promise broken. They said they would not run a deficit in 2019. That is another promise broken. Now they are announcing that they are going to triple the Liberal carbon tax.
I am going to be a good sport today. Could the Liberals break their promise to triple the carbon tax?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, it is time to get serious about the big issues facing our country.
I believe that we need climate action, and I hope that all members of the House will agree. As Minister of Finance, I understand very well how important climate action is to our economy. If we do not create a green economy, it will be impossible for Canada to succeed in a green world.
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are struggling to make ends meet under the Liberal government. In B.C., the cost of gas is now over $2.25 a litre. The cost of groceries has skyrocketed to a 40-year high.
The Liberals are set to make things worse. On January 1, the government is planning to increase taxes on paycheques, ripping money from Canadians' pockets and stuffing government coffers instead. Why will the Liberals not give Canadians a break from just inflation and just cancel their planned tax increases instead?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the challenges facing Canadians on affordability are extremely important. That is why the government has acted to, for example, double the GST tax rebate to provide relief for Canadians who are struggling with inflation, which is a global concern.
With respect to the price on pollution, the hon. member knows full well that the rebates that are provided to the vast majority of families in this country are more than they actually pay. I would suggest to my colleague, who comes from the same province as me, British Columbia, that the price on pollution in British Columbia is a British Columbia-made price on pollution. It was implemented long before the federal system, because British Columbia was a leader in fighting climate change.
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC
Mr. Speaker, the B.C. price on pollution, as the minister calls it, has not reduced emissions, and the rebates do not go back to British Columbians. They go to the NDP government in Victoria. What he would see is the tripling of the carbon tax, which would result in the $2.25 going to $3 a litre. We will never accept that.
Why will he not cancel the tripling of the carbon tax and stop gouging British Columbia families?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the hon. member that if he has a problem with the fact that British Columbia does not rebate the money back, he should have a conversation with Premier Horgan. At the end of the day, the rebate system that is in place wherever the federal backstop is in place provides more money back to people than they actually pay. The vast majority of Canadian households receive more money back.
With respect to his point about not reducing emissions, I suggest he look at some of the academic studies, including one from Duke University, which show that it actually does reduce carbon emissions.
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberal logic claims that the carbon tax will reduce emissions, but the reality is that the Liberal carbon tax has had no meaningful impact on the environment. The carbon tax has succeeded only in driving up the costs of food, fuel and home heating. While their tax hikes dive deeper into the pockets of Canadians, it is more than just inflation that is making it even harder to make ends meet.
Will the Prime Minister abandon his carbon tax hike, or is his goal truly to make the most basic necessities unaffordable?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, I would say that certainly the issues of affordability are extremely important to every member in this House and to all Canadians. That is why the government has acted to address affordability issues.
With respect to some of the statements regarding the price on pollution, I suggest that the hon. member do a bit more homework. There are 45-plus countries around the world that have implemented a price on pollution. Virtually every academic study tells us that it is the most effective and efficient way to reduce emissions. In Canada, emissions dropped by 9% in the last reported study, so what she is saying in the House is simply not true.
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Mr. Speaker, quite regularly, when I ask questions in this place, it is typical for a Liberal member to mansplain me and tell me what I need to do.
Despite imposing a costly carbon tax on Canadians, the Liberals have failed to meet every single climate target that they set. The Liberal carbon tax has done and will do nothing for the environment. The only achievement of their carbon tax has been to drive up the cost of living and make basic necessities unaffordable. It is more than just inflation soaring. Canadians simply cannot afford the Liberal government.
If the Prime Minister cares about affordability, will he cancel tripling the carbon tax?
Carla Qualtrough LiberalMinister of Employment
Mr. Speaker, if Conservatives cared about affordability, they would have voted in favour of the unanimous consent motion yesterday that would have seen hundreds of thousands of Canadians with disabilities lifted out of poverty by moving forward with the Canada disability benefit. If they cared about lifting people out of poverty and making life more affordable, they would help kids with disabilities have access to dental care, and if they wanted to make life more affordable for low-income Canadians with disabilities, they would vote for rent help.
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, all the human trafficking going on at Roxham Road would disappear immediately if the federal government suspended the safe third country agreement. However, the minister is doing exactly the opposite. He is expanding it. He is building a city.
Radio‑Canada recently reported that the federal government is not suspending the agreement, but rather expanding its facilities in response to the record number of asylum seekers this year. The government is set to open a new complex on November 1, and it will stay open until 2026.
How much longer does it plan to help human smugglers expand their business operations at Roxham Road?
Marco Mendicino LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times now, we had a very solid agreement with the United States to work together on this very complex issue.
There are pressures at Roxham Road. That is why we continue to work with the Government of Quebec. We are investing in additional resources at the Canada Border Services Agency and the RCMP.
We have to recognize that there is no one solution to this issue. We must continue to work together.
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Public Safety said that he was very proud of the work the government is doing to protect the rights of refugees at Roxham Road.
What is he proud of? Is he proud that families are being exploited by criminal human smugglers and that it is costing them $10,000 a head? Is that a good price? Is he proud that these families are being welcomed to Canada by the police? Is he proud that their applications take years to be processed?
Of all the things I just mentioned, which part is the minister most proud of?
Marco Mendicino LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the refugees who are continuing to do their part on the front lines. I am proud of the refugees who are helping to alleviate the labour shortage, not just in Quebec, but across Canada. There are plenty of examples of positive contributions made by refugees.
We will continue to invest in the necessary resources to resolve the situation at Roxham Road. The Bloc Québécois needs to stop complaining in the House and start coming up with real solutions. That is how we can work together.
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, we have only been telling them for three years now to suspend the safe third country agreement. If that is not a solution, I do not know what is.
Let us talk about the negotiations with the U.S. They have been going on for a long time. This was in the Liberals' 2019 electoral platform. They said they would continue to work with the United States to modernize the safe third country agreement. At this point, we are entitled to wonder if it is actually being discussed.
Meanwhile, the federal government is opening new facilities at Roxham Road.
When will the government suspend the safe third country agreement instead of holding ribbon-cutting ceremonies at Roxham Road?
Marie-France Lalonde LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration
Mr. Speaker, we make it our duty to protect Canadians and secure our borders. At the same time, asylum seekers must be treated with compassion, and they have a right to due process.
The safe third country agreement is an important bilateral tool for handling asylum claims at Canada's land border. We are in constant contact with the U.S. government on issues related to our shared border, including the safe third country agreement.
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister may want to consult the Government of Canada's financial literacy website. The section called “Tax basics” lists the types of taxes Canadians pay: income tax, GST and, yes, the federal payroll taxes of EI and CPP. Despite the finance minister's protests, her own website clearly states that these are taxes.
Any tax hike, including raising payroll taxes, only serves one purpose: to take money out of the pockets of Canadians.
Will the Prime Minister cancel his planned tax increases on Canadian paycheques?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite just said that our CPP and EI contributions only serve the purpose of taking money out of the pockets of Canadians. Let us think about that for a minute. That is absolutely reckless. We contribute to the CPP so our seniors can have pensions when they retire. Not everyone is a member of Parliament. Not everyone has the pension that the members opposite and members on this side of the aisle enjoy. We need to be responsible. Canadians rely on their pensions.
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
Mr. Speaker, thanks to “Justinflation”, northerners' paycheques are already running out before the end of the month.
TaxationOral Questions
The Speaker Anthony Rota
I am sorry, but I am going to have to interrupt. That is being dragged out a little too much. It is doing indirectly what you cannot do directly, so I want to remind hon. members to try to keep some decorum in the chamber and not mock each other. It is just not parliamentary.
The hon. member will please continue.