Debates of June 10th, 2025

Opposition Motion—Canada Carbon Rebate and Payment to Quebec

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am not too sure if I fully understand the question, per se. I will reinforce the questions I have been asking members of the Bloc, in terms of understanding and appreciating the timing of that particular rebate and the many individuals who are on fixed incomes, whether they be seniors, people with disabilities or low-income families, who were very much dependent on that deposit or cheque. I suspect it would have caused a great deal of hardship to Canadians not to have it, which is the reason the decision was made to continue forward with the rebate.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Repentigny.

On April 22, just six days before the federal election, millions of Canadians got a cheque from the federal government. It was a generous payment presented as a carbon rebate totalling $3.7 billion. Cheques were as much as $456 per household, but Quebeckers did not get a dime. However, Quebec taxpayers paid their unequal share of that expenditure. Their income taxes funded nearly $814 million of that rebate. They paid part of the bill, but they were excluded from being beneficiaries. That is an egregious injustice, it is an unacceptable vote-buying action, and that is what the Bloc Québécois condemns today. We have moved a clear, legitimate and fair motion today that is asking the federal government to immediately and without conditions reimburse Quebec for its contribution equal to $814 million. It is not a privilege and it is not a favour. It is a question of justice.

Let us look at the facts. The new Prime Minister made an order on April 1, 2025 repealing the federal carbon tax. The carbon tax rebate was paid out on April 22, but it covered the period from April to June 2025, a period where carbon pricing did not even apply. It is written in black and white on the Finance Canada website: “Payments delivered to Canadians in April would thus return the fuel charge proceeds collected during the April-June quarter“. Since no proceeds were collected, however, the government paid those rebates directly from the public purse.

My goodness, what a lovely gift for the rest of Canada. Those public funds also include the taxes paid by Quebeckers. Quebec was excluded, however. Why is that? Because it was not subject to the federal tax, but the tax that was eliminated on April 1 did not fund anything. The fact is that those rebate cheques were a purely political gesture paid for by everyone and distributed to nearly everyone, excluding Quebeckers. Let us recall that Quebeckers were never entitled to the carbon tax rebate because, in 2013, Quebec chose to adopt its own carbon pricing system. It is a system that is recognized, credible and effective, with links to California and Washington state. It is a system that works. It is a system that Quebeckers embraced out of a sense of responsibility, and now they are penalized for doing the right thing.

Let us look at some concrete examples. A family in Mont-Joli received no part of the $456 paid to their Canadian neighbours. A senior couple in Amqui was paid no part of the $334 that their taxes helped to fund. Students in Rimouski, workers in Trois-Pistoles and retirees in Sainte-Angèle-de-Mérici got nothing at all. They all paid their fair share, but they did not get their piece of the pie.

Meanwhile, households in other provinces receive a cheque for a tax that no longer even exists. Canadian unity sure is wonderful. This is not just an economic injustice; it is also an abandonment of the environment. By abolishing its carbon tax, the Liberal government is sabotaging its own climate policy. It is betraying Canada's international commitments. It is giving in to the Conservatives' simplistic propaganda.

Let us remember that 90% of the tax revenue was returned directly to households, and according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, eight out of 10 Canadians got back more than they paid. That is what Justin Trudeau's Liberal government has been telling us for the past 10 years. Why scuttle an effective policy? It is because the “Axe the tax” slogan is easier to sell than a transition plan. It is also because, six days before the election, a cheque is much more attractive than an energy transition project. There are consequences to that choice. While the government is abandoning carbon pricing, the European Union is preparing to implement a border carbon adjustment as early as next January.

Concretely, that means that products from a country like Canada, which does not put a price on carbon or pollution, will be subject to surtax in the European market. In that case, who suffers? Canadian companies will, but not Quebec companies. Why? Because Quebec is responsible and it still has a price on pollution. While Ottawa is making Canada weaker, Quebec is wisely preserving its access to international markets.

However, from everything I have just said, Quebec is the one being punished, even though it is doing all the right things, is responsible and has taken action, and above all refuses to take the easy way out. The Bloc Québécois is not the only one making this request today. The National Assembly is making the request unanimously with its motion from April 23, which demands that Quebec receive its share, meaning over $800 million. What response did the Prime Minister give? It is no big deal, Quebec has another system. The Prime Minister gave a clear and unequivocal refusal, a refusal to recognize an injustice, a refusal to respect Quebec's elected officials and the National Assembly's unanimous request.

The motion we have moved today is not just a partisan plea. It is a basic demand for justice and respect. It aims to correct a clear mistake, a decision made in haste during an election, without a thought for tax fairness among the citizens of this country. Today, we are simply asking that Quebec be treated with respect, that its taxpayers be reimbursed for what they have paid and that the government finally listen to what every single elected official in Quebec has been calling for. Of the $3.7 billion distributed, including $814 million financed by Quebec, Quebeckers received zero dollars.

Quebec took action. Quebec is paying. Today, Quebec is demanding fairness. Elected officials in the House must respond fairly.

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

Mr. Speaker, first I have a comment, and then I will get right into the question.

The consumer carbon tax was a backstop. Not only the Province of Quebec but also the Province of British Columbia had its own internal policies dealing with the issue. As a result, the rebate never went to either one of those provinces, so the member does a disservice to try to give the false impression that this is an attack in any way on the Province of Quebec.

I want to pick up on the industrial carbon pricing issue, because I agree. The European Union and other countries are looking at ways in which they can apply tariffs to those jurisdictions that do not have some form of making big polluters pay. I am wondering whether the member could provide additional comments with respect to why that is so important.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Winnipeg North has contradicted himself a lot. I will remind him of the facts. His government's Department of Finance has said that payments made to Canadians in April would give back the federal fuel charge proceeds collected from April to June.

What does my colleague not understand about that? The tax, which was repaid in advance, no longer existed between April and June. I think that the Quebeckers listening to us today are not fooled. It was an election giveaway.

Let us look at how clever the Liberal Party was to send out cheques right before the election. Let us remember that, in August 2021, a cheque was sent out to seniors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Liberal Party is able to deliver cheques in mailboxes during election periods, but when it comes time to solve problems like the Phoenix pay system, it is too complicated.

A little consistency and a little rigour from our colleague from Winnipeg North would do no harm, and it would elevate the debate in the House a bit.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will ask my colleague, who is also my riding neighbour, whether he has had the chance to hear the amendment we proposed this morning and whether he agrees with it. I would like him to give us an answer.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I salute my colleague and riding neighbour. I think that one thing about the Conservatives is clear. We know that some people still deny science. Nonetheless, in terms of respecting jurisdictions, the Quebec government is free to choose its own carbon market.

The Conservatives moved a motion today that seeks to interfere in areas of jurisdiction. Someone in the Conservative Party or its Quebec caucus needs to explain in English to their colleagues from Alberta or western Canada that, when they move a motion to abolish Quebec's carbon exchange, they are not respecting jurisdictions. I think that is akin to talking out of both sides of one's mouth. They are saying they respect jurisdiction but then they table a motion that will do the opposite.

The answer is quite simple: The Bloc Québécois is opposed to the jurisdictional encroachment the Conservative Party seeks to undertake through its motion today.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I did not consider it necessary to clarify the purpose of the motion, however, in light of the questions I am hearing this morning, it would be good if my colleague could repeat yet again that no one paid the carbon price in April, May or June but that everyone except Quebec got a refund.

I think this reminder would be good so that we can finally have a discussion on the actual subject.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if there is something I have learned in politics, it is repetition. It is not that some people do not want to understand; rather, some people do not want to know.

It is pretty simple. During the election campaign, the Liberal Party and its leader abolished a tax that was no longer in effect. As a result, some people received a rebate on a tax that was no longer in effect. Who did we not get a rebate? I must admit that this affects Quebec, as well as British Columbia and other jurisdictions. That said, only the Quebec National Assembly spoke up to ask for the $814-million reimbursement.

I am trying to explain this a simply as possible to my colleagues. An election cheque landed in the mailbox before the election was called. It is as simple as that. We are simply asking to be reimbursed because we did not get our fair share.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since I have been in the House of Commons, I have heard several Liberals and Conservatives say how proud they are to represent their Quebec constituents in the House. They thanked their constituents. However, I no longer hear this when it comes to defending Quebeckers on financial and other matters and making the voice of Quebec and this nation heard on issues that they believe are important, such as a healthy environment. The people of Quebec have developed through renewable energy. They have freed themselves from having to depend on international markets for heating. I think that we should be proud of this. We should be proud of what has been done. Quebec has positioned itself as a leader in the fight against climate change compared to many other states. It is a carbon market pioneer. We must seriously commit to the Paris Agreement and participate in the global effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the face of a climate crisis that is hitting almost every corner of the planet, as we are seeing again today with the forest fires.

Canada was a little behind, and in some respects, it decided to join the global trend by putting a price on carbon. However, in a blatant attempt to win votes, the new Liberal leader decided to abolish federal consumer carbon pricing by signing an order in council on March 14. Then the election was called. Ten days later, on March 23, the carbon tax was officially abolished. On April 1, in the midst of the election campaign, there was no longer a price on carbon. However, we know why the Liberal leader at the time decided to do away with a climate policy that he originally said was important to his party. Many Liberals said that it was a good policy. The Liberal leader at the time even denied the work of his colleagues, such as the former environment minister, the current member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie, who said it was a good policy. Why did he do that? It is basically because the Conservative leader had been hammering away at the public for three years with slogans about axing the carbon tax. The Conservatives tried to demonize it in the public eye. Obviously, they wanted to take advantage of the electoral momentum. The strategy that we deplored, of course, was when the Liberal leader decided to axe this tax. Yes, the Liberals did away with those environmental policies in response to pressure from the Conservatives.

However, Ottawa decided to still issue a rebate for a tax that had been abolished, with the last payment going out on April 22. Oddly enough, on April 22, the election campaign was in full swing. It is important to understand that this tax was supposed to be paid. The rebate was supposed to cover what Canadians would be charged in the following three months. All Canadians, except Quebeckers and British Columbians, received cheques, which were sent out in the midst of the election campaign.

It is simple. We call that giving out election goodies. The cost was $3.7 billion. It was not funded by the proceeds from the oil and gas levy. It was funded directly from the government coffers. The cheques sent to Canadians ranged from about $220 to $456 per family. That $3.7 billion came out of the government coffers. It belongs to all taxpayers, including Quebeckers. Quebeckers paid for this election gift and did not get so much as a penny in return. In Quebec, we paid for this, but we got nothing. The Liberal government gave an election gift to the rest of Canada at Quebeckers' expense.

I think that the situation is very clear. It is unacceptable. It is an injustice. Among other things, we are paying for the responsibilities of provinces that have not done their part. Quebec is responsible enough to have a carbon exchange with California and other states that are taking the climate crisis seriously. As we can now see, this crisis is not imaginary. It is hitting western Canada with forest fires, the smoke from which has spread as far as England.

That $814 million was taken from the pockets of Quebeckers to send cheques to Canadians. That is $814 million that will not be invested in health, education, child care, public transit or the fight against climate change, when those needs are urgent. Everyone knows that.

All the parties in the Quebec National Assembly agree. They adopted a motion calling on all the federal parties to commit to returning to Quebeckers, without conditions, the $814 million that was taken from their pockets. That money belongs to them.

How did the new Prime Minister respond to this demand from the Quebec National Assembly? He said that Quebec had chosen a different system, that this system is still in place and that this final payment would apply only to the rest of Canada. Let us tell it like it is: This is nonsense. He refuses to acknowledge the very simple fact that the final cheque was not paid by the rest of Canada, as he claims, but that it was paid by all taxpayers. His argument is flawed. It does not hold water. We have been demonstrating this since this morning and we will continue to do so throughout the day in the hope that parliamentarians will listen to reason. Our motion gives the government and all parties an opportunity to correct the situation, to be on the right side of history, and to respond appropriately to the Quebec National Assembly's unanimous request to resolve this injustice.

Beyond this specific injustice, we must recall the broader implications of eliminating this important part of carbon pricing in Canada. It does not augur well for the fight against climate change. We have seen this since the new government took office. Unfortunately, Canada is not on track to meet its international commitments. We are not the ones saying that eliminating carbon pricing was a bad idea; it is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the OECD.

The federal government, including Prime Minister Trudeau and his ministers, often said that it was a good policy for most Canadians and that close to 80% of people got back more than what they paid, especially low- and middle-income households. Even the Parliamentary Budget Officer acknowledged this, and he was very clear about it. Unfortunately, the Liberals did not defend their policy well. They were unable to make people understand the urgency of the climate crisis, to stand up and implement policies to meet that challenge. Now, Quebeckers are the ones who are paying the price for their mistakes.

It is a political decision, and it is clear that there has been no change in the Canadian oil monarchy's current goal of producing and exporting as much oil from the oil sands as possible. Unfortunately, the Liberals and the Conservatives, of course, like to confuse the interests of Canadian oil companies with Canada's national interests, but we have to be careful not to confuse them with Quebec's national interests, which are definitely not the interests of oil companies. Despite the fact that Canada is the world's fourth-largest oil and gas producer, in Quebec, we have decided to move away from oil and gas, and we are being penalized for that right now. It is costing Quebeckers $814 million because we are standing up and taking this climate crisis seriously.

A choice has to be made. We are talking about climate justice and financial injustice. Here in the House, it is clear that the government is defending the oil and gas lobby. Now, we expect it to defend the interests and wallets of Quebeckers. The government needs to rebuild trust. It is a matter of justice and fairness for Quebeckers.

We are hoping for a positive response from our colleagues to the unanimous request of elected representatives of the Quebec National Assembly. The message could not be clearer. Remedying this situation would certainly be a good starting point. We would be glad to discuss the policies that this government should or should not introduce if it seriously wants to fight climate change. Today, however, it is important that members of the House support this motion to require the federal government to remedy the situation. We, in the House, cannot accept that election goodies intended to directly influence an election and assist in electing a government should be paid for out of taxpayers' pockets, especially not the pockets of Quebeckers.

In short, this is about defending the national interest and climate justice. The parties would send a clear message if they did the right thing and supported our motion. We are talking here about public funds that were used in a discriminatory manner for electoral purposes, and I think a red line was crossed. The least we can do is discuss the matter, but the most important thing is for members to vote in favour of this motion today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity in several questions to ask why the Bloc did not see the benefit of us going into an election and on April 1 making the decision to stop collecting the carbon tax. At the end of the day, the rebate cheques were part of the budgets of the many individuals I have emphasized: seniors, people with disabilities and fixed-income or low-income individuals. Not giving them out would have had a fairly negative impact on those people.

The carbon tax was applicable to the provinces outside of British Columbia and Quebec. Does the member not have any sympathy for those individuals?

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the comments I have been hearing from the opposite side of the House since the debate started are quite outrageous. It kind of seems like the hon. member is taking us for fools.

We are absolutely not opposed to the idea of helping people who are struggling with the cost of living. The problem today is that money was taken from Quebeckers and given to Canadians. That is the problem. I fail to understand what the member does not get about that. I cannot make it clearer: Election goodies were paid for by Quebeckers, but they themselves did not receive a cent. That is the problem.

No matter how my colleague says it, he is not going to take us for fools. Quebeckers paid for vote-buying cheques. The Liberals must do the right thing, back off and send cheques back to Quebec.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my regards to my colleague, and congratulations on his long-standing political involvement and on his election as the member for Repentigny.

The member knows very well that the issue that we are discussing today was raised during the election campaign. All the facts were known during the campaign and even during the leaders' debate. The leader of the Bloc Québécois put the question directly to the Liberal leader, who fumbled and was unable to give a clear answer. This happened in the middle of the debate. Ten minutes later, all the commentators gave their opinions on the debate and, lo and behold, five panellists on the state‑run news network said the Liberal leader had won, even though the leader of the Bloc Québécois had clearly raised the issue.

My question is this: How can the member for Repentigny accept the fact that, even though Quebeckers knew all this, they elected 44 members who have been particularly quiet today in this debate—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I must interrupt the hon. member to give the member for Repentigny a chance to answer the question.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I salute my hon. colleague and congratulate him on what I believe is his seventh consecutive election win.

Let us be clear, today's debate is about $814 million that was taken out of Quebeckers' pockets to pay for election handouts to Canadians. The debate is not about who won the leaders' debate or whether the fact that it was mentioned in the leaders' debate and 44 members were still elected justifies the action that was taken.

If we ask Quebeckers today, I am sure they will all say that it is completely unfair. They will ask to be reimbursed for those cheques.

I expect the Conservative members to be very clear and to get over their past position on the carbon tax. Today's issue is not the carbon tax, but an election handout paid for out of the pockets of Quebeckers.

I hope that you will set aside your ideology to defend Quebeckers' wallets in this situation and that you will ensure that the government changes its position.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I would like to remind the member for Repentigny that he must address the Chair. He used the word “you”. I do not have a position, but members do.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have been following this debate since the beginning of today's opposition day. It started at 10 o'clock this morning. It is now one o'clock in the afternoon, and there are still several hours of debate to go before the end of the day.

There was something that struck me. Since the beginning of the sitting, not a single Liberal member from Quebec has risen to speak about this. Not a single one has spoken up. However, there are 44 of them. What does that mean?

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, no matter where members come from, even if they are from outside Quebec, I hope they will rise and support this motion. This is a matter of justice, and I am sure that no one in Canada would want to be played for a fool the way Quebeckers have been.

The members from Quebec, more than anyone else, should stand up proudly and support our motion.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Les Pays-d'en-Haut.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to take part in this opposition day debate. In the recent federal election, Canadians demanded a serious, ambitious plan to make life more affordable for everyone in Canada.

Bill C-4 implements the plan designed to help Canadians, including those in Quebec, keep more of their hard-earned money. In addition, it aims to reduce income taxes for Canadian workers in every province and territory. It also eliminates the consumer carbon pricing legislation.

After it was eliminated, eligible Canadians did receive a final Canada carbon rebate payment on April 22, which was roughly two months ago. The federal government based this decision on the fact that many Canadian families, particularly those living on low incomes, were counting on the April rebate and had planned their budgets accordingly. As my hon. colleagues already know, the Canada carbon rebate payments, which were intended to return most of the proceeds of the federal fuel charge to households, were only made in provinces where the federal carbon pricing backstop applied. Since Quebec's current fuel charge system exceeded federal standards, the federal fuel charge did not apply to that province, which means that Quebeckers did not receive these Canada carbon rebate payments. With the elimination of the charge, our government is now able to refocus federal carbon pricing and pollution standards by ensuring that all carbon pricing systems are in place across Canada for a wide range of greenhouse gas emissions from industry.

Quebec has long been a pioneer in regulating large emitters. Quebec has already solved this problem. This is important, because carbon pricing for businesses is one of the most important policies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions across Canada. According to research by the Canadian Climate Institute, Canada's carbon pricing systems will be more effective at reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 than any other policy. They will help us reach our national emissions reduction target of 45% to 50% below 2005 levels by 2035. With strong carbon pricing for large emitters, we will be able to drive innovation and competitiveness nationwide by attracting investment in emissions reduction projects and creating more well-paying green jobs for Quebeckers and for all Canadians. This approach is sure to make us a more attractive trading partner. It will also allow us to protect Canadian businesses, including those in Quebec, from the carbon pricing that countries and regions such as the U.K. and the European Union are imposing on countries that do not yet have a carbon pricing system.

It is important to remember that this bill not only eliminates the federal fuel charge from legislation, it also includes significant tax cuts for Canadians right across the country, including in Quebec. Once it receives royal assent, this legislation will remove the goods and services tax, or GST, for first-time homebuyers on new homes up to $1 million, saving Canadians up to $50,000.

These are promises we made during the election campaign. As we talked to people on the campaign trail, we heard that many young Canadians would like to buy a house. This part of the bill will help young Canadians, including Quebeckers, do just that. The bill will also lower the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million. Eliminating the GST would have a positive effect on supply. It could stimulate new home construction right across Canada and enable us to address the housing crisis that is affecting us—

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order.

Is the member talking about today's Bloc Québécois opposition day motion?

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I thank the hon. member for her intervention.

I am sure the hon. member will bring her speech back to the topic at hand. However, members are given a great deal of latitude to express themselves during debate.

The hon. member for London West can continue her speech.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will pick up where I left off.

As I was saying, the GST reduction we are proposing will allow many young Canadians, including those living in Quebec, to buy their first home. Eliminating the GST will affect everyone in Canada, including Quebeckers. In addition, young Canadians could benefit from lower anticipated housing costs, making it easier for them to enter the housing market and realize their dream of buying their first home. During the election campaign, we all heard young people say they wanted the opportunity to buy their first home. As a millennial, that is a dream I share with two generations, generations Z and Y from across Quebec and Canada.

This measure would build on the already substantial federal tax support provided to first-time homebuyers through programs such as the tax-free first home savings account, the home buyers' plan, the registered retirement savings plan and the first-time homebuyers' tax credit.

In addition, under Bill C‑4, the government is also going to offer a tax cut for the—

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

I realize that members have some latitude while debating issues in the House. However, that freedom should not be unlimited. I would like to know if you could ask the member to focus her remarks on the motion before us on this opposition day. Liberal members have many opportunities to debate government bills, but opposition days are few and far between.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I thank the member for his comment.

As he said, members do have a certain amount of latitude. Members will have a chance to ask questions during questions and comments.

The member for London West may resume her remarks.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, our Bill C-4 also includes a tax cut for the middle class. This does relate to the motion we are discussing today. We are talking about cutting the carbon tax. As I said earlier, Canadians wanted a little more money. We are therefore explaining how we will offer lower-income Canadians additional opportunities to contribute and live healthy lives across the country, including in Quebec.

Getting back to what I was saying, this bill will provide tax relief for the middle class by cutting taxes for nearly 22 million Canadians, saving families in Canada and Quebec up to $840. Canadians, including Quebeckers, could start seeing these tax savings on their paycheques as of July 1 of this year.

Hard-working Canadians with taxable incomes below $114,000 in 2025 will benefit the most from these tax cuts. I talked about Canadians who hoped to have a little more money after April. We are working on a plan to show how these Canadians will be able to get a little more money. All Canadians will benefit from this cut, regardless of the province they live in, which was not the case for the Canada carbon rebate.

That is just the beginning. We are determined to continue helping hard-working Canadians save money. That is the mandate they gave us and that is what the government is going to do. We are reviewing core spending and government efficiency to help cut costs and increase productivity across the public service.

We are also taking measures to eliminate internal trade barriers with a goal of reducing costs by 15% and adding up to $200 billion to our economy, or potentially as much as $5,000 per Canadian. We are also cancelling the tax increases on capital gains to help stimulate investment in our communities and encourage builders, innovators and entrepreneurs to grow their businesses in Canada.

In the fall, we will table a well-thought-out budget that will advance our primary objective of investing more in the people and businesses that will grow our economy.

As His Majesty said in the Speech from the Throne, in all of its actions, the government will be guided by a new fiscal discipline: spend less so Canadians can invest more. By working together, we will fight climate change and strengthen Canada's and Quebec's economic resilience in a rapidly changing global landscape.

We are going to build a stronger, more unified new economy, an economy that will create better-paying jobs and higher incomes for everyone—the strongest economy in the G7.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her speech, but I wish she had spoken more about the opposition day motion than Bill C-4.

Before I ask my question, I would first like to apologize to my colleague. Earlier today, when she asked me a question about my speech on the Bloc Québécois opposition day motion, I came down on her, saying that she would have to explain to her constituents why $10 million was diverted from her riding and given to the rest of Canada. I thought she was a Quebec MP, but she represents an Ontario riding. Consequently, her riding actually benefited from the diversion of those funds.

I would like to know whether my colleague can tell me why no Quebec Liberal MP has risen today to speak on this issue. Is her party preventing them from speaking, or are they ashamed of their position?