Debates of Dec. 7th, 2023

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and Families

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Victoria for her very interesting speech. I also thank her for all her hard work and her passion for the environmental and climate emergency files, as well as for housing and first nations issues, both in British Columbia and across the country.

The Conservatives are still pathologically obsessed with the carbon tax, which is really a price on pollution. When we talk about a price on pollution, we are clearly talking about the environment, climate emergencies and the climate crisis. Speaking of the environment, I cannot help but mention the Liberal government's announcement this morning about a cap on greenhouse gas emissions in the oil and gas sector.

Two years ago, at COP26 in Glasgow, the Prime Minister said we had to implement a cap on greenhouse gas emissions in the oil and gas sector. We waited two years. What we are seeing today is worse than anything we feared, worse than anything we imagined. I am sure my colleagues will believe me when I say that we have quite a rich imagination.

It is appalling to ask society as a whole to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40% to 45%. In fact we could have a discussion about the proportionality and burden of responsibility of every Canadian and the Canadian economy with respect to the targets we need to reach to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees or 2 degrees. We are heading more for 2 degrees. We should be prepared to reduce our emissions by 50% to 60%, because, per capita, Quebeckers and Canadians create a lot of pollution and produce huge amounts of greenhouse gases.

Let us consider a 45% decrease. Two years ago, we were told that the oil and gas sector would probably have to reduce its emissions by 31%. That means 10% to 15% are now gone; that is a gift from the government, thank you very much. This morning we learned that the oil and gas sector no longer has to reduce its emissions by 31%, but that the Liberals would be happy with a 16% to 20% decrease. That is ridiculous. It is irresponsible for our children and for future generations. Given the climate emergency, that is a joke. Why is it a joke? Because this government listens only to lobbyists from big oil.

We said it yesterday, and again today: In the past two years, there have been 2,000 meetings with lobbyists and representatives from oil and gas companies. Considering there are 365 days in a year, that amounts to more than three meetings a day between oil lobbyists and the ministerial offices of a government that calls itself pro-environment. That includes Saturdays, Sundays, Christmas Day, Easter, Hanukkah and more. Then we wonder who the Liberals are listening to. There were three times more meetings between oil company representatives and the Prime Minister’s Office, the Privy Council, Treasury Board and Finance than there were meetings with environmental groups.

That is the root cause of what we are seeing this morning. This joke they call a “cap” is nothing but rubbish. There is nothing in it except a blank cheque to the oil companies so they can continue to do business as usual. Not only has the reduction dropped to 16% to 20%, but these corporations have no obligations until 2030. They have carte blanche for the next seven years and after that a bit of flexibility. That means they will be allowed to continue increasing production. I do not know how they are going to achieve a 16% to 20% reduction while continuing to increase production. There is so much flexibility in the document presented by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change that it reminds me of a yoga class with people able to perform the most absolutely incredible contortions.

This is totally irresponsible on the part of a government that claims to care about the climate and the environment, but then puts this kind of nonsense forward this morning, even though oil and gas is the economic sector that emits the most greenhouse gases. I believe it is responsible for 24% of total emissions. That is huge, even more than transportation.

The increase in Canada's greenhouse gas emissions since 1990 is mainly due to an 88% increase in emissions from the oil and gas sector. It emitted 100 million tonnes in 1990, 168 million tonnes in 2005, and 189 million tonnes in 2021. Now the government is telling the oil and gas sector that it will not have to worry for the next seven years. The government is giving it carte blanche, or should I say “carte noire”. The oil and gas sector can carry on polluting as much as it wants. There might be a target sometime around 2050, maybe. We will see. Sadly, this is consistent with the Liberals' vision and proposals since 2015.

We learned just this week that the government plans to subsidize oil companies to the tune of $12.5 billion for carbon capture technology. That is a page out of the Conservatives' playbook. The Minister of Environment, once an environmental activist, basically copied and pasted the Conservative Party leader's plan, a far-fetched fantasy in which a magic technological wand solves all our problems. This is public money paying for this, even though we know that carbon capture technology is not proven, has not been properly tested and is not producing the promised results.

We need to shift toward the centre and have a strong energy sector that focuses on renewable energy. That is what the science has been telling us for years, but the Conservatives and the Liberals are going in the completely opposite direction. That is not surprising from a government that bought the Trans Mountain pipeline, which has so little future that no private sector player wanted to buy it. It was also the Liberals who saw to it that everyone here, along with the people we represent in our ridings, is paying for it. At first they were talking about $7 billion. Then it was $12 billion, then $16 billion. Now we are at $30 billion for a pipeline that, in 20 or 30 years, will no longer be used, because it will transport the dirtiest oil in the world, the most expensive to extract, and no one will want it anymore.

It is not surprising that the Liberal government is also authorizing projects like Bay du Nord, which once again means an increase in pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. It is not surprising that the Liberals and the Minister of the Environment, in February, issued oil and gas exploration permits off the coast of Newfoundland for 12,000 square kilometres of delicate marine ecosystems. They also issued exploration permits to ExxonMobil and to British Petroleum.

This is the Liberals' record: a government incapable of meeting its targets, as we learned in the environment commissioner's latest report, a government that authorizes oil and gas projects and has just given Canadian oil companies a leg up to continue to do what they do while asking all citizens and companies in our economy to make an extra effort.

The situation is disastrous. Do we remember the forest fires last summer? Do we remember the consequences of increasing natural disasters, as we call them? These disasters are in fact less and less natural: The science and all the reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC prove that they are becoming more frequent and intense, and have greater consequences on our economy, populations, and health.

There is a very interesting article today on Maria Neira, director of public health and the environment at the World Health Organization. She says that the air pollution that is causing respiratory problems and an increased incidence of asthma in young children is directly linked to the burning of fossil fuels. This is not a hypothesis. This is what is happening.

Both the Conservatives and the Liberals are being irresponsible and not taking measures to reduce the consequences of pollution and climate change on human life and health, but also on our economy and the future of our society and our communities.

People can count on the NDP. We will fight and take climate change seriously.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know how many emails, visits and phone calls the member has received from his neighbours about the cost of living. On this side of the House, we know that life is not affordable for Canadians and that this is a big problem, especially for the first nations.

First nations have filed a judicial review that says that climate “cannot be healed at the expense of” communities.

How does the member respond to that?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I agree with him completely. People in Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie are worried about the cost of living. People write to us about rent and the cost of groceries. In the House, the ones who are doing the most to lower the cost of groceries are members of the NDP. We are the only ones saying that big companies should have to pay a special tax on excess profits. We are the only party saying that the big grocery chains should be governed by a code of conduct to make them treat consumers with more respect. Only the NDP brought the rich CEOs of these companies here to ask them questions in parliamentary committee, while the Liberals do nothing.

Getting back to pollution and the climate crisis, the only difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives is that the Conservatives do not even pretend to take these issues seriously.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I asked Mr. Weston and the others questions this morning about this code of conduct, which we, as Liberals, also support. Perhaps we are doing more than my colleague thinks.

My Conservative colleagues are saying that carbon pricing is the sole reason for higher grocery prices. However, I heard them asking Mr. Weston questions this morning in that committee meeting. They recognize that there are other factors driving up costs, and that is why they want to get the companies to agree to abide by this code of conduct.

Does my hon. colleague agree with the Conservatives that carbon pricing is the only thing driving up costs, or does he think that there are there other factors at play? It cannot be both things at once.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for that very good question.

Grocery bosses should not be the ones writing the code of conduct for the major grocery chains. The code should not be voluntary. It should not allow them to manage and discipline themselves. We need an independent body. That is important to the NDP.

A price on transportation-related pollution, for example, could certainly have an impact. However, food prices have risen faster than inflation for 24 months now. Corporate greed must have something to do with it. Corporations are lining their pockets and making record profits, and their executives are getting exorbitant paycheques.

We must not blame everything on the carbon tax. It does not even exist in some provinces, such as Quebec and British Columbia, where it literally has no impact.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, I know that, supposedly, we are to be talking about how to better advocate for first nations, as the motion states, but I think we all know that is not the real intention of this motion.

I recall when the Conservatives were in government and the enormous number of cuts they made to indigenous services. The current Liberal government is also failing first nations with the impending cuts it is planning to make in the next budget.

I wonder if the member can share with us what kind of work the NDP is doing to show that it is the party fighting for first nations, Métis and Inuit.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for such an important question. The concerns of first nations, Inuit and Métis are truly at the heart of the NDP's work on social justice and true reconciliation.

I want to congratulate my colleague from Nunavut for all the work she is doing, especially on indigenous housing and on having a housing program for and by indigenous peoples. Housing is a major issue in the north in general, where people have felt the effects of Conservative budget cuts and are now feeling the effects of inadequate Liberal investments.

These people can count on the NDP, which will continue to speak out about the challenges of housing and the cost of the groceries for first nations, Inuit, Métis and all northerners.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Saskatoon—University.

It is very simple. We want to cancel the carbon tax for farmers, first nations and families.

We know that mortgages and rent have doubled and that it is basically impossible to buy food for a family. Unfortunately, a new report indicates that groceries will cost an extra $700 per family next year.

I want this NDP-Liberal government to be honest with Canadians. The carbon tax is raising the cost of living. When the carbon tax drives up costs for farmers and truckers, the cost of living increases for all Canadians. I like bologna, but I do not like it when the Liberals feed Canadians baloney.

Sadly, after eight years, we know that Canadians are experiencing the greatest financial difficulty since perhaps the Great Depression. As the leader of His Majesty's loyal opposition has taken to saying many times, if pictures of the lines outside a food bank were in black and white, everybody would believe that we were back in the so-called dirty thirties.

The NDP-Liberal government has shattered the dreams of many Canadians. It was interesting to hear the response from my hon. colleague when I asked a question just a minute ago with respect to the emails, phone calls and visits that every member of this House receives in their office every day. I cannot understand why they choose to ignore the folks who put them there. We know very clearly, because everybody wants to look at a poll now and then, that it is at their own peril. I suggest that Canadians, as I said in French, are not foolish. They recognize very clearly the peril that their financial situation is in. We know that many Canadians are $200 away from being broke at the end of the month. That is a situation nobody wants to be in. Many Canadians are way beyond that. There are two million Canadians visiting food banks. That is 5% of the population.

I had the opportunity to visit the food bank in my hometown of Truro, Nova Scotia. Sadly, we know its client roster has ballooned to 1,800 folks. In a small town of around 12,000 people, there are 1,800 clients. We know from an incredible study done from my alma mater at Dalhousie University that groceries will cost a family of four an extra $700 next year. This is an incredibly sad state of affairs.

In that report, there was an interesting quote that talks about food bank use. It says, “This is the highest level of food bank use in Canada on record,” and, “In 2024, it is probable that Canadians will continue to experience the strain of food inflation, compounded by increasing costs of housing, energy, and various other expenditures.”

As I said in French, we all know that when we tax the farmer who grows the food and we tax the truck driver who ships the food, then ultimately the person at the end of the line paying for the food is going to have to pay more. We know that when we tax businesses more, they pass that cost onto consumers. That is a simple fact of business; it is not one that we like.

I do wish to highlight a couple of interesting stories, which are incredibly heart-wrenching, from my own riding.

In the recent past, I had an opportunity to speak to a couple who would have been very close to retirement. They have been married in the 25-year range and told me, and this is hard to believe, that sadly they had to sell their house. They were very close to paying off their house and could not pay the mortgage. I am the parent of three kids and two grandkids. A parent would not want to do this, but they took the money they gained as a profit from selling their house, as meagre as it was, and are going to pay it to their daughter because they are going to live in her basement. It is absolutely mind-blowing. These are stories that, in generations, have not been heard. It is incredibly gut-wrenchingly sad to hear a story like that.

I heard another from an older lady who lives on her own. She made up a new term. I was going to say this in French but I did not know how to say it, and this is really not a word in English, but she called it “ungrocery”. She would do her grocery shopping and go around with her cart, as we all do, putting things in that she would like to have. Then at the end of her tour around the grocery store, she would add up the cost of those items. She knew she could not afford it all, so she would go back around the grocery store taking things out of her cart, doing the math in her head and then realizing what a meagre amount of groceries she was actually able to afford. That is what “ungrocery” is. It would be exceedingly sad, of course, if that made it into common language in Canada.

We also know this carbon tax needs to be removed not just from families but from farmers and first nations. First nations have filed a judicial review over the federal carbon tax, noting very clearly that the climate cannot be healed at the expense of communities. We know very clearly the burden that is being placed on the backs of Canadians every single day. The debt the NDP-Liberal government has inflated over its eight years of ridiculousness has debt service charges now that would be equal to the Canada health transfer. It is incredible the burden of payments that will be required by generations to come.

The great thing is that Canadians are paying attention. They are understanding this message. The know the fiscal irresponsibility of the NDP-Liberal coalition is something that has to change. We know the hundreds of emails we are receiving every day are a reflection of the sad reality and the fiscally irresponsible position the NDP-Liberal government has put Canada in.

Its members can go on and talk about their machinations with debt-to-GDP ratio and those kinds of things, but what Canadians know is they cannot afford to heat their homes and to put food on their tables every single day, if they are fortunate enough to have a place to live. That is what we know and the message is resonating with Canadians that the NDP-Liberal government has to go.

Right now, its members could easily vote for the opposition motion today to axe the carbon tax to make life more affordable for everyday Canadians who call our offices and who will gladly put the NDP-Liberal coalition out of business.

Indigenous Services

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, there have been consultations, and I believe that if you seek it you will find consent for the following motion.

I move:

That a take-note debate on Indigenous Services be held on Monday, December 11, 2023, pursuant to Standing Order 53.1, and that, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House: (a) members rising to speak during the debate may indicate to the Chair that they will be dividing their time with another member; (b) the time provided for the debate be extended beyond four hours, as needed, to include a minimum of 12 periods of 20 minutes each; and (c) no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.

It is agreed.

The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

The motion is carried.

(Motion agreed to)

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and Families

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the Conservatives speak to the motion, and have have been listening to previous speeches, and the Conservative Party is spreading misinformation through social media and things of that nature. The member himself did it, to try to give the impression that the vast majority of constituents I represent would have more money in their pocket as a direct result of taking away the price on pollution. This is the “axe the tax” propaganda. He knows full well that, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, this is not the case.

Does the member not have any shame in trying to express to my constituents and Canadians that they are actually getting less money, when, in fact, when we factor in the rebates, they are getting more money in their pockets to allow them to buy more?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the mathematically challenged NDP-Liberals, and perhaps they are challenged in reading either of Canada's official languages, that the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report, which all of us on this side of the House have read, would say that Canadians are worse off. I guess the fact of the matter is that if the member is so excited about the great and rosy financial picture of Canadians, then it would only make sense that axing the tax would be very simple. That is because what that would mean, of course, is that there would be even more money in the pockets of Canadians with such a great and rosy financial picture.

How can the member make sense of the fact that two million Canadians, more than at any time in history, are actually visiting food banks? If the member, who, I believe, must be arithmetically challenged, does not understand that, then I do not know how better to explain it other than by the fact that, of course, constituents call, email and visit our office every day, making it very clear that their financial picture is that they are close to bankruptcy.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as the saying goes, one step forward, two steps back. That is the impression I am getting from this debate. We are concerned about people who are struggling with the cost of living, and we are concerned about the housing crisis that is affecting our constituents. However, the Conservatives' proposal would do nothing to correct these situations, just like the government's climate change policies.

There is one thing that could be done. Canada is a petro-state, and climate change affects everything we are talking about: the price of groceries, agriculture, housing and food. In that context, how do the Conservatives aim to present a serious plan to address climate change?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, very clearly, there are two parts to the answer.

One is that, first and foremost, we need to make it more affordable for Canadians to live. There will not be a country if people cannot afford to eat, to heat their homes and to house themselves. We know that those are the three main requirements to having a life to live, so that is very important.

The second incredibly important point is that we know clearly on this side of the House that Conservatives continue to put forward great ideas. For example, the leader of His Majesty’s loyal opposition put forward a 15-minute video releasing his housing documentary. However, the Liberals, of course, did not even have the decency to watch it. If they did watch it, we know exactly what would happen, which is that they would abscond with those ideas. They took advantage of the credit for the great Bill C-323, which was released. It happened to be my bill. What did they do? They included it in their mini budget, because they are out of ideas, and, of course, we all know they are out of time.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Speaking of being out of time, I am going to give the reminder that I have not given in a while, so I am pretty happy that I get to do it: the shorter the questions and the shorter the answers, the more people who get to participate in the debate we are having today.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Saskatoon—University.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to take part in this very important and timely debate. I am very concerned about our country, and I hope all 338 of us take some time to talk to Canadians over Christmas. Let us knock on 100 doors, go and find out, straight from the people we work for, what life has now become after eight long years of Liberal government, the policies it has enacted and the living hell that Canadians are living through because of the Liberal policies.

Today, we are going to talk about the carbon tax. There are many terrible policies the Liberals have put forward, but this is just about the carbon tax and what it has done to Canada. It is with a heavy heart that I am reading the statistics of what Canadians are facing: 30-year high inflation challenges just to live. What does that mean? It means that Canadians are not keeping up with inflation. At the end of the month, there are more days left than there is money in the bank account. That means Canadians are skipping meals.

We are the breadbasket of the world. I come from a province that grows things that we sell to and that feed the world. We are put into this task by God; we are given this land by God, to feed the world and to feed Canadians. We grow so much that, as Canadians, we cannot eat all that we grow, so we trade. We are a trading nation, and that is a good thing. It is what actually sustains families on the other side of the world. The policies of the current government mean that there are families starving, not just in far-flung places around the world but also right here in Canada. Eleven million Canadians needed food stamps or their equivalent from the government last year. They could not provide enough for their family to eat. The government had to help one in four Canadians. This is not right.

These are very, very tough times for Canadians, and things are going to get tougher. That has more to do with the interest rate hikes and what they are going to cause with respect to mortgage renewals. They are going to skyrocket. Right now, families are holding on by their fingertips. The tipping point is going to come in a number of months and years as mortgages are renewed. The problem also occurs on rental properties, so we know that rents are going to go up. We know that the price of rent in Canada has doubled already. What happens when the owners of rental buildings have to renew their mortgages? Rents are going to continue to go up.

What we are debating today is a terrible tax. It is a tax on movement. It is a tax on things we used to do very well in this country. We do things. We are known as a country that grows more canola and more wheat than anywhere else in the world. We build things. We rip it out of the ground. We refine. We value-add different God-given gifts to our country, and we sell because we cannot utilize as much as we can produce in this country. That is a good thing. That is how, for over 150 years, we have been so prosperous as a nation. What we have, from eight long years of the current Liberal government, is an attack on that, with the carbon tax on anything that moves. If it continues to move, the government taxes it harder.

We know that the Liberals are going to quadruple the tax. What is that going to mean? Academia's theory of the carbon tax is that if the Liberals keep increasing the price, people will stop using that item. The theory is faulty. All we have to do is look at the price per litre of gasoline in other parts of the world that are not as gifted with natural resources as we are. In Europe, it is roughly equivalent to around $5 to $6 Canadian per litre. Europeans are still driving; they have to drive. In Canada, we have to drive in order to get to work to provide for our family. We need to utilize oil and gas to produce the crops that feed the world.

The one disincentive that the government has decided on is to attack anything that moves. That is what the carbon tax does. It is a tax on being productive. Just look at what it has done in Atlantic Canada, where the government has carved out a special deal that exempts the region from tax on home heating oil. It has destroyed the argument of why we need the carbon tax. The government, supported by the NDP, has proposed that if home heating oil is to be exempt in Atlantic Canada, it is due to the cost of living. Wait a minute. Did it not just say that Canadians receive more money back than they pay? The rationale for Atlantic Canada is that people there are in a cost of living crisis, which they are. To make things better just in that region of the country, not all over Canada, the government removed the tax. The government's argument that people receive more back has just been blown to pieces, because if that were true, then the government has actually made the cost of living crisis worse in Atlantic Canada. Therefore, it is not believed to be true.

The government has also argued in favour of making more expensive the dirtiest forms of energy with respect to emissions. The worst for emissions is home heating oil. It actually made that cheaper, the one source of energy that, if the government believed in its logic, should have been costing more. The government's arguments are blown out of the water.

I will get back to my conclusion of why this all wraps up into the motion. If we look at the troubles we are facing in Canada, we know that it is tough out there. Anything the Canadian government can do to make life more affordable is something we should act on today. We have a long list of things the government should have been doing for the last eight years, but it has decided to ignore those suggestions. Just with this motion today, we could remove the carbon tax on home heating for farmers, first nations and families, three groups that are hurting and that we could affect today.

Take off the tax, and, instantaneously, food prices would drop, because the tax is baked into all of the actions of a farmer. If we remove the tax, instantaneously, food would become cheaper for first nations. There is a lot of neglect from the government on reserves, but I cannot think of a worse example than this: A lot of first nations and reserves use electricity to heat their homes. Right now, the government is jacking up the rate of carbon tax on those homes, homes of individuals who are barely holding on with the cost of living crisis that is taking place, and now, it is going to quadruple the carbon tax. The third group is families. We know that they are going to have to pay $700 more next year alone just on groceries because of the carbon tax. That is $700 in sports fees they will not have. Layered on top of the troubles with interest rates increasing, we know this is a recipe for disaster. There are Canadian families that are just struggling now but will be starving.

I am not putting blame on anyone, but this is a Liberal policy. It is not the families of the Liberal members of Parliament that are going to be suffering. It is going to be the other families throughout Canada that have a severe challenge with the cost of living. We can make that all better today. Increasing costs are not all going to be reduced because of the policies of the government, but this is one area in which, if we act as Parliament, we could act before Christmas to make food cheaper, to make life more affordable and to make Canada that much better. If I am true to the people I represent and the stories I hear, I cannot think of another group that has been so challenged under the Liberal policies and that we need to provide relief for. That is what the motion would do.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to state some facts. This is not a Liberal policy. The carbon tax was first established in British Columbia by a right-leaning Conservative government under the mask of the B.C. Liberal Party. Therefore, I find it quite interesting when I hear B.C. Conservatives in this place talking about getting rid of the federal carbon tax, which does not apply in British Columbia. I state that fact on its own.

Another truth is that the New Democrats have asked for the removal of the GST on all home heating. The Conservatives had it in their election platform, but they voted against it. In their election platform, the Conservatives had a price on carbon, but today they do not want to talk about that. It is like they have amnesia.

Let us talk about the need for a school food program. The advocacy for the need for a school food program started under the Harper government when inequality skyrocketed.

Maybe the member could talk about why he voted yesterday against the implementation of a strategy for a national school food program. Perhaps he could also correct some of the facts of why the Conservatives ran on a platform to put a price on carbon, but today they do not support that.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Mr. Speaker, this tax is bad. It makes everything more expensive, does nothing for the environment, because Canada has missed every emissions target since it was brought in. It is a terrible tax that does nothing for the environment and hurts Canadians, and the proof is in the last eight years.

On food equality, I cannot think of a more hypocritical position as the NDP's. The New Democrats claim to be the party of the workers and the poor. The people this tax hurts the most are their supporters. People who have the least ability to pay increased costs on food and heat for their homes are the ones suffering the most. The most dire emails and phone calls I get at my office are not from people who are well off. They are from people who have the least ability to pay for these increased costs.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I sat through the speech of the Leader of the Opposition this morning, and we certainly know what he is against. He has waged a war against science. He has waged a war against climate change. He has waged a war against green infrastructure investments and the green economy. We know what he is against, but I am not certain we know what he is for at this point.

His campaign is not what he brags and boasts it to be. It is not an axe-the-tax campaign. It is actually an axe-the-facts campaign that he has waged against all the things I just referenced, and Canadians know that.

When will he present an environmental plan for Canadians that will actually do something, that is based on science, that will address climate change and all the issues that come with it? That is my question for the member.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Mr. Speaker, if we want to talk about what will actually do something, it is scrapping the tax. It will make food and heat more affordable across Canada. That is an actual solution.

If we want to talk about actual solutions for the environment, this tax, which is supposedly an environmental policy, has not hit a single emissions reduction target. The only year there was a reduction was the first year of the pandemic due to everything being locked down. If the position of the Liberals, supported by the NDP, is that we have to again lock down societies, where nothing moves, nothing grows and nothing flourishes, if this is the policy of the Liberal-NDP government, then I welcome the next election.

We know there are technological solutions. We have faced difficult environmental problems in the past. When I was growing up, the ozone hole was going to cause everybody to get skin cancer. I was paranoid and scared about it. However, it was not a tax that solved that problem; it was technology. With acid rain, it was the same thing. It was going to melt our buildings. Technology solved that problem.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to say to my colleague that we need to stop the disinformation.

I also want to make a couple of very important reminders. First, the carbon tax does not apply in Quebec. Second, households outside Quebec that pay this carbon tax receive financial compensation that is in no way related to their profession or marital status. It is based on their income.

Third, the Conservatives' proposal excludes many households for no good reason. How do they define family? What about single people or the elderly?

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is all about fairness. Quebec does not directly pay the cost of carbon tax 1, but it pays carbon tax 2.

I will give an example from my province. We are going to grow some mustard. For that mustard, all the inputs that go into putting seed in the ground, harvesting and shipping that grain to a processing plant is all taxed with the carbon tax. Then it gets to the plant and it is processed into mustard. Before we put that mustard on a hotdog, we pay a carbon tax for the production of the seed, the production of the mustard and the transportation into Quebec. Yes, people are going to be paying more carbon tax if they elect the Liberals.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is another day that we have the privilege of rising in the House to speak for our constituents back home. I see some of my hon. colleagues who I was with for several hours last night at committee. It was great to finish clause-by-clause of Bill C-50, the sustainable jobs act, which will assist citizens across our country.

I am happy to participate—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order, please. There are conversations going on and I would ask members to take them to the lobby so we can continue with the debate on the floor.

The hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.