Debates of June 10th, 2025

Opposition Motion—Canada Carbon Rebate and Payment to Quebec

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The member for Shefford has time for a brief question.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be brief and I will go back to my colleague's previous question.

As far as I know, as a Quebecker, I pay taxes to Ottawa. My colleague does not understand that the Liberals' vote-buying cheque, which was paid using the so-called carbon tax as a pretext, was actually funded through taxes that I and other Quebeckers pay. Everyone says that Quebec is not part of it and has its own system, but that is not the issue, and my colleague does not get it. Those cheques were paid for with income and sales taxes that I paid.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Madam Speaker, while I appreciate the member opposite's passion, I still respectfully disagree with her argument. I think it is a deeply flawed argument. The Bloc asks us every day in this House, and in every committee meeting that I have ever been in, to respect Quebec's autonomy. Quebeckers did not pay federal fuel charges to the federal government, because they opted out of the system that would have been backstopped by the federal government.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière.

It is an honour and a privilege to rise in this House and deliver my first remarks as a newly elected member of Parliament for the riding of Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt. Please allow me a few minutes to acknowledge the individuals who helped me make this possible. First, I would like to thank all the constituents of Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt for their support and for putting their trust in me. A heartfelt “thank you” goes to the incredible volunteers who, under the direction of my campaign manager, Diane Suski, worked tirelessly to get me here today. I was overwhelmed by the support from family, friends and even people I had never met. From all regions of the riding, they believed in hope and change. Their hard work was instrumental to the success of the campaign.

My wonderful wife of 35 years, Sylvie, makes me the best version of myself. If not for her and her love and support, I would not be standing in this place today. My thanks go to Sylvie. My three children, Shanel, Jesse and Carly, make me the proudest dad on earth. I love them all. Their generation and the next generation are the reasons I decided to participate in this election. I believe that becoming a member of Parliament for the Conservative Party of Canada will enable me to make a difference.

I am very proud to be francophone. It is a culture that must be preserved. There are over one million francophones outside the beautiful province of Quebec. I encourage Quebec to think about solutions rather than separation. Canadian unity is as important as ever.

My great-grandparents, Joe and Azilda Bélanger, left Saint-André-Avellin in search of a better life in Ontario in 1886. Azilda was the first pioneer woman to settle in the village of Rayside, which is now part of the city of Sudbury and was renamed Azilda in her honour in 1901. L'écho d'un peuple, the theatrical extravaganza that retells the story of 400 years of French culture, paid tribute to her in one of the scenes. I still live on the same land that was cleared by my grandfather.

For those who are not familiar with the geography of the riding, let me say this: It is big. It stretches from West Nipissing north to Mattagami, south to the French River and then west along the Trans-Canada Highway to the edge of the town of Spanish and the entirety of beautiful Manitoulin Island.

The people in my riding are as diverse as its geography. We have people from all backgrounds, starting with the proud indigenous people. Their knowledge and traditions are a crucial part of our communities. I look forward to developing strong relationships with them.

Like many other Canadian communities, many residents of our riding are descendants of European immigrants, families just like mine, hard-working Franco-Ontarians who came to Canada generations ago in search of a better life.

The people of northern Ontario are skilled and resourceful people who work in the industries that drive Canada's economy. Forestry, mining and the support services that supply these industries are some of the major drivers of the economy in northern Ontario. However, many might be surprised to learn that northern Ontario has a significant agricultural industry as well. There are approximately 700 farming operations in the area, ranging from cattle and dairy to cash crop operations that produce high-quality products for Canadians. We also have a thriving tourism industry that draws tens of thousands of people every year from around the world to enjoy the beauty and majesty of our land. We have camping, hiking, snowmobiling, fishing and hunting. Our region is also home to some of the best fall agricultural fairs in the country.

I will now turn to the Bloc Québécois opposition motion. Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt is a region where affordability is no longer a distant political concern, but rather a daily crisis that hits families at the gas pump, in the grocery store and in their monthly heating bills.

We are here today to debate a Bloc Québécois motion that raises real concerns about fairness, transparency and the use of taxpayers' money. While we do not share the goals of the Bloc Québécois, I do believe that we can agree on one thing: Regardless of their province, Canadian taxpayers deserve a government that respects their contributions and treats them fairly. This is not about fairness or principles; it is simply a matter of policy.

I would also like to remind the House that, even before I was a member of Parliament, I remember that the Bloc Québécois voted against all Conservative opposition motions to repeal the carbon tax. The people in my riding will not accept that either.

The Bloc Québécois will realize that the province of Quebec has done very well with Canadian taxpayers. Every year, the Government of Quebec already receives $29 billion in transfer payments from the rest of Canada. It receives $13.6 billion through equalization, $11.9 billion through health transfers and $3.8 billion through Canada social transfers.

Canadians are generous and compassionate people who believe in sharing the wealth of our great country. However, this Bloc Québécois motion is nothing more than theatrics and will only serve to divide Canadians at a time when we should be coming together. I guess that is their goal. This is what happens when politicians focus more on appearances than results.

In Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, people are not asking for more bureaucracy, more cheques or more discount games. Let us start building a government that works for everyone, in every province, with the same respect and the same accountability. I thank the House for its attention.

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

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his election. I am glad to see that, in his case, he still speaks French. We all know what often happens to francophones outside Quebec. The assimilation rate is quite disturbing, after all.

My question for my colleague is about today's motion specifically. His lack of solidarity is disappointing. Perhaps he will understand if I put it this way: Does he think it would be right for the federal treasury to send out cheques to everyone in Canada except people in Sudbury, even if the people of Sudbury helped fund those cheques?

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Speaker, the people in my region are very glad that the carbon tax is gone because it made everything in our part of the country more expensive. The cost of everything went up because of it.

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

Madam Speaker, I do appreciate a number of the comments that the member opposite has put on the record, and I especially agree that the Bloc's motivation, in terms of moving this particular motion, is to be very divisive. At the end of the day, we recognize that some provinces, whether it is B.C. or Quebec, and I believe the Northwest Territories but I am not 100% sure of that, did not contribute into the consumer price on carbon.

In fact, the measure that was taken was to support low-income seniors, in particular, and others to ensure that if they had the budgeted amounts of money in April, they would in fact continue to receive that rebate. For the Bloc today, it is more of a political manipulation to try to score cheap political points.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Speaker, I feel that the rebate that was sent to most Canadians was a method of buying votes for the Liberals.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would first like to congratulate my colleague on his election.

I would also like to congratulate him on his French today. It is nice to hear members from this big beautiful province address the House in French, despite some minor errors that are not worth noting. I heard some murmurs about a French error at one point, but we should be encouraging people to speak French and not pointing out the little mistakes that can happen when people do not use French every day. I congratulate him on that.

In his speech, my colleague talked about the size of his riding. I imagine it must cost a fortune in gas to travel across his entire riding. Are the member and his constituents very happy about the elimination of the carbon tax, something the Conservatives have been proposing for years and the Liberals have finally implemented?

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Speaker, yes, people in our part of the province are very glad to see the consumer carbon tax gone. That is really bringing expenses down. If the industrial carbon tax is not removed as well though, that cost will be passed on to consumers in the region and it is going to hurt. That is why all carbon taxes have to be removed.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Madam Speaker, as a proud Franco-Albertan, I was very interested in what my colleague said about the vitality of the French language in northern Ontario. In Canada, there are many rural francophone communities that are really suffering as a result of the carbon tax. It has not been eliminated as the Liberals would have us believe; rather, it has simply been reset to zero. Could my colleague tell us about how it is affecting communities in his riding?

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Speaker, the carbon tax did indeed have a major impact on our region. I would like to thank my colleague for addressing the issue of French in our region, because we need to protect the French language.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

Madam Speaker, since this is my first speech in the House, I would like to take a few moments to thank the people of Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière for placing their trust in me and for giving me the privilege of representing them for a fourth term. It is nice to see that the support from my constituents has continued to grow since I was first elected in 2015. I am extremely grateful for that.

I want to personally thank my campaign manager, Isabelle Laplante, who has been my right-hand woman since almost the very beginning of this great adventure in Ottawa, and Anabel Grondin, the newest member of my team, who quickly learned what to do in an election campaign. I also want to thank my official agent, Serge‑André Tardif, for whom this was a brand new experience. Finally, I want to thank the president of my riding association, Marc Nolin, along with all of leaders and volunteers who worked hard to ensure that Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière remains a great Conservative riding.

This election was unlike any other for me. It was a very emotionally difficult time that I would not wish on any of my colleagues. To wrap up my remarks about the election, I want to thank my wife and my two daughters, Marie‑Soleil and Justine. We have always been a close-knit team in good times and in bad, and we have just been through the worst with the loss of my son, David, four months ago today. He was with us in our hearts every day of this election campaign.

Once again, I want to thank everyone for their messages of solidarity and support. I am motivated to continue my work as the member for Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière and to bring all of my experience and determination to that task. I know that David will always live on in my thoughts and in my heart.

During this election campaign, people told me how concerned they are about the future and the direction taken by the Liberal government over the past 10 years. Although President Trump wormed his way into our election debates by creating economic chaos around the world, the everyday priorities of the people I met, whether in their homes, at the grocery store or at events, have not changed. Issues such as the rising cost of living, lack of housing, skyrocketing home prices, rising crime, weak justice system and out-of-control immigration were top of mind for everyone. As we saw again this week, Canada has the second-highest food inflation rate among all G7 countries.

During the election, the Liberal leader presented himself as the man with a plan, yet he cribbed freely from other parties' platforms, notably from Pierre Poilievre's Conservative plan. He even happily and unreservedly condemned Justin Trudeau's Liberal team for the disastrous state Canada is in today.

It seems that he finally listened to the Conservatives' call to axe the carbon tax. As the unelected prime minister designate, he even dipped into public funds to give all Canadian citizens a nice little present—all, that is, except those in Quebec and British Columbia. As far as election goodies go, it rivalled Maurice Duplessis's refrigerators.

We might therefore have expected the Prime Minister to ditch all the ministers who had blasted the official opposition all these years for having the colossal nerve to demand an end to the carbon tax. Trudeau's cabinet ministers used to rise one after another to vilify the nasty Conservatives, accusing them of being willing to stand by while the planet burned with their loud demands to axe the carbon tax. The minister of environment and climate change at the time never missed an opportunity to tout the carbon tax as a cure-all for every climate ill and every wildfire, and to warn us that evil oil and gas users would have have to pay, pay, pay.

We were also expecting the man with the plan, this Liberal banker, to come forward right away with that plan and to be fully transparent, as promised, about what he was going to do to address the housing crisis, to end inflation, to prepare for the recession being forecast by more and more economists and to get public spending under control.

The man with the plan actually promised to limit government spending increases to 2% a year. However, we have heard nothing but radio silence since he was elected. He is no longer talking about that.

First, we learned that government spending will increase by 8% this year. The government is adding $500 billion to the bill that future generations will have to pay. That is four times more than he promised.

Second, everyone will remember the epic series of contradictory remarks that the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and the Prime Minister made to the media shortly after the election. First they said there would be no budget, but there would be an economic statement. In the end, they said there would be a budget, but it would not be presented until the fall. Basically, it was a bit chaotic over there. That said, it was all of a piece with the last 10 years of the Liberal government.

Finally, we realized that the man with a plan did not have a plan ready this spring and that he would not be tabling a budget this spring. There is still time for him to make good on his own throne speech, which calls on him to table a budget this spring. He will have the opportunity to do so this afternoon by voting in favour of the Conservative opposition motion. The opposition is reaching out and asking the government to end food inflation, come clean with Canadians about the state of public finances and table a budget before Parliament rises for the summer.

Third, his new cabinet brought back the main ministers responsible for the chaos that Justin Trudeau caused over the past 10 years. It is just terrible to see these ministers defending the same Conservative ideas today that they fought against for 10 years. Their titles have changed, but what about their values, their ideals and everything they said for 10 years? All of that has evaporated. It is gone. We know it is just smoke and mirrors. A thirst for power may have blotted out the last 10 years of their lives, but as the saying goes, “what's bred in the bone will come out in the flesh”. Let us see who will be the first to show their true colours.

I would now like to speak to the Bloc Québécois's motion. It is not possible to talk about the Bloc Québécois and the carbon tax without first mentioning its visceral hatred of oil and gas. That is quite a paradoxical position for a party that represents the regions of Quebec, where gasoline is absolutely essential to everyday life. People need it to go to work, to drive their kids to school, to go to the grocery store, to work in the fields and to travel the long roads that connect one village to the next. For the Bloc Québécois, oil is just dirty, and Quebeckers must pay the price. It was Bloc Québécois MPs who said that the carbon tax should be much higher than it is. What does the Bloc Québécois think now about the fact that Quebec is still a province that levies a carbon tax and makes Quebeckers pay more for their gas by maintaining a carbon pricing system? How does the Bloc Québécois feel about the fact that, last week, I paid $1.16 a litre here in Ontario to fill up my car, whereas, when I came back to Ottawa this week, I paid $1.55 a litre in Thetford Mines for the same gas and for the same distance?

This is a recurring theme in the daily lives of many Canadians who feel that the cost of living is rising. Gas prices have accounted for much of this increase. Does the Bloc Québécois agree that Quebeckers are currently disadvantaged in many respects with all the taxes on gas? Why does the Bloc Québécois think it is acceptable that Quebeckers should pay for the war on carbon all by themselves and that families, especially those in rural areas, should be deprived of hundreds of dollars each year, money that they could be using to pay their bills?

Fifty-six per cent of Quebeckers believe that Quebec should end its carbon pricing system. Furthermore, 68% of Quebeckers want the carbon tax to be shown separately on their gas bills. The Bloc Québécois voted with us for a budget to be tabled this fall. The Bloc Québécois rightly wants to know the state of public finances and the Liberal Prime Minister's plan. What is the state of the deficits? What is the government's operating deficit? How will the Liberals pay for the things they have promised?

I have another question, and this time it is for the Liberals who were elected in Quebec. Did they pressure the banker Prime Minister to extend this vote-buying exercise to Quebeckers? Did they let this injustice happen without standing up for the interests of Quebeckers?

At first glance, the Bloc Québécois's request may seem legitimate, but it does not take into account the other request made by the Bloc on the state of public finances. It is not possible to play for the Liberal team, promise the moon and the stars and make all kinds of commitments, and say that everything will change overnight without telling Canadians and Quebeckers how much money is in the bank account and how much of that money will have to come from the credit card.

Who will have to pay off this credit card? We know very well. I assume people know that credit cards have to be paid off eventually. I assume that most of our colleagues here know that. The problem we have is that the debt has become so big in Canada that we are not the ones who will pay off our own debt. It will be our children, our grandchildren, our great-grandchildren. If this continues, we will never see the end of this debt. Demanding a budget at this time is the right thing to do. The Bloc Québécois was right to join us in amending the reply to the throne speech. We expect the Prime Minister to table a budget to ensure fairness for all Canadians and Quebeckers.

I would like to use my remaining speaking time to move an amendment to the Bloc Québécois motion. I move that the motion be amended by deleting the words “without conditions” and “estimated at $814 million” and, in the last paragraph, by replacing the word “Quebec” with “Quebeckers and British Columbians” and adding the following: “when the Government of Quebec ends its cap-and-trade system to compensate Quebeckers who have paid for and are still paying for that system”.

I think that would make it fair. It would mean that Quebeckers would receive a cheque directly from the federal government, as the citizens of the other provinces have. That way, Quebeckers would save at the gas pump every day.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

It is my duty to inform hon. members that an amendment to an opposition motion may be moved only with the consent of the sponsor of the motion. In the case that he or she is not present, consent may be given or denied by the House leader, the deputy House leader, the whip or the deputy whip of the sponsor's party.

I invite the whip of the Bloc Québécois to take the floor.

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

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois is opposed to the amendment.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

There is no consent. Therefore, pursuant to Standing Order 85, the amendment cannot be moved at this time.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière mentioned at the beginning of his speech the hardships he had to overcome during the election campaign. These are personal hardships that have touched all of us as colleagues. He is someone we appreciate very much and I think that we cannot remain insensitive to what he has been through. Our thoughts were with him and they are with him again today.

To come back to his speech, however, I must acknowledge my colleague's talent as an actor. He knows very well that his reading of the carbon exchange and the carbon tax in the rest of Canada is false, but he makes a speech giving the impression that all this is true when he knows full well that it is not. In short, he is an excellent actor to whom I would certainly give an Oscar, but we are not there yet.

Canadians outside Quebec who were subject to the carbon tax received one last cheque. Ninety per cent of the revenue from that tax was remitted. As a result, 80% of households benefited from this rebate compared to what they were paying in carbon pricing. My colleague knows that very well. This is all well and good because they received one last cheque that was completely unjustified during the election campaign, but in the coming months, they will no longer receive any of those cheques.

How will my colleague explain to people outside Quebec that they are no longer entitled to this compensation and that, by the same token—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I am interrupting the hon. member because his question is a little too long for his two minutes.

The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable—Lotbinière.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

Madam Speaker, allow me to take this opportunity to thank my colleague from the Bloc Québécois, as well as all of my federal, provincial and municipal colleagues of all stripes, for their solidarity. I felt it, and it really helped our family. I would like to thank all of my colleagues for their words of solidarity.

That said, I am not an actor, and I would like to know what I said in my presentation that was not true. Quebec has a greenhouse gas cap-and-trade system, which means that Quebeckers pay more for their gasoline than Canadians in other provinces. I gave a clear example: Last week, I filled up at $1.12 per litre in Ontario and, Sunday, I paid $1.55 per litre in Thetford Mines before coming here. It is the same gas. That is not a fantasy. It is a fact. It is realistic.

Quebeckers deserve a bit of respite, too, when it comes to the price of gas, because they live in a large province where travel is necessary. Not all places have public transportation, so we need to use our personal vehicles. I do not think that I am dramatizing. These are facts and nothing but the facts.

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

Madam Speaker, at the outset, I will express my personal thoughts to the member regarding the situation that he found himself in and his opening comments.

Having said that, I want to get clarification. Is it the position of Pierre Poilievre and the Conservative Party that they do not believe that seniors in Alberta, the Prairies, Ontario and Atlantic Canada should have received the rebate check back in April? Is that the position of the Conservative Party? Many of those individuals, in particular seniors and individuals on fixed incomes, would have been anticipating it and possibly incorporated it into their own budgets.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

Madam Speaker, right in the middle of the election campaign, the Liberals just happened to send out cheques to reimburse Canadians for money they had not spent. It was easy to send a cheque to every Canadian; it was also very convenient. The timing was perfect for sending a cheque signed by the Liberal government.

However, the reality is that the government forgot two provinces. As long as it was taking money from general government funds, why did it not send the same cheque to all Canadians? I agree that that was terribly unfair. I wonder why the 40 or so Liberal members from Quebec did not take a stand against taking everyone's tax dollars and sending them to parts of Canada.

We believe that the money that the federal government sent some Canadians should be sent to all Canadians, including all British Columbians and Quebeckers, once the greenhouse gas cap-and-trade system in Quebec has been lifted.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be able to speak for the first time in this new Parliament on a subject that I find extremely relevant. Before I begin, like many of my colleagues, I would like to say a few words of personal thanks, and look back at the spring election campaign, which was not without its challenges, emotions and hardships. I want to send a heartfelt and very sincere thank you to a wonderful team of volunteers. The Bloc Québécois gang in Drummond was absolutely fantastic. We almost had to turn people away at the door. We had so many volunteers and so many people willing take part in the campaign, which was not going to be easy from the outset. We already knew that, yet volunteers of all ages—young, old, not so young, older and those who have been young longer than others—got together and came together to lend a hand and run a campaign that was extraordinary in many ways. I want to thank those volunteers sincerely.

We all do it here in the House. I know we are all very grateful for the work that is being done in our respective ridings. However, the work of our supporters is essential. It allows us to be in direct contact with our people as well, to hear their concerns and to know how to align our positions. I do not think we thank them enough. We do it at the beginning of every Parliament, when we should be doing it almost on a weekly basis, so I want to thank all those people who have been truly essential, exceptional and who have maintained a fantastic morale, which gave me great sustenance throughout the campaign.

I especially want to thank two volunteers who are, in my opinion, extraordinary. Perhaps members will understand my bias here. They are my parents. My parents are 85 years old. During election campaigns, they complain that they are not given enough work. My father complains, at 85, that I do not give him enough areas to cover to go and meet people. My mother complains that we do not give her long enough lists for phone canvassing. They come knocking on the door early in the morning. They are the last to leave. Frankly, I could not be prouder of these two volunteers, my parents, Henriette and Louis. I want to emphasize how fantastic they are. I am convinced that they will still be there in the next election. They are truly exceptional people. They deserve a statue. I am working on that.

I also want to acknowledge and recognize the unwavering support of my immediate family, my wife Caroline, our children Tom, Lily-Rose, Alexandrine and Christophe. Frankly, without them, without their understanding of what an election campaign is and what the life of a member of Parliament entails, I would not be able to do this job. I think that everyone in the House would agree.

Last but not least, I want to salute my outstanding team in Drummond. Andrée-Anne, Isabelle and Marlène have been providing impeccable service to the people of my riding for years. Once again, I am very privileged to be able to count on such fantastic, dedicated, committed, competent and delightful women. I am truly surrounded by exceptional people. I would also like to acknowledge Rémi, the newest member of my Parliament Hill team. He has run for the Bloc Québécois twice and is a full-fledged member of the Bloc team in his own right. I am very proud to have him with us.

As I said earlier, I am very pleased to speak to this Bloc Québécois motion. We were looking forward to this opposition day. I want to highlight some of the key points in the saga of this rebate for a carbon tax that had already been abolished. To make a long story short, government funds were used to send out rebates and refunds for something that was supposed to be paid later. However, the quarter covered by the April 22 rebate did not exist. The carbon tax had already been abolished, as of April 1. In short, money was used during the election campaign for false reasons, literally.

Who was left out of all this? As today's Bloc Québécois motion says, those who were left out were Quebeckers and British Columbians, who had acted responsibly by joining the carbon exchange with California, Washington State and soon Oregon. To call a spade a spade, this fictitious rebate was nothing more than an election giveaway.

Anyone with a modicum of decency, ethical integrity and respect would look favourably on the request we are making today, which is to compensate Quebeckers fairly for the election giveaway they helped fund through their taxes. After all, we are talking about an estimated contribution of $814 million. That is not just pocket change.

Since this is my maiden speech in this Parliament, Madam Speaker, I would like to pause for a moment and tell you that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Shefford.

I would like to point out a few things about this rebate business. The first is that, by repeating a slogan based on falsehoods probably spread by the oil companies themselves, certain people succeeded in making Canadians believe that the carbon tax was eating into their purchasing power and costing them dearly. In reality, deep down inside, the Conservative members knew perfectly well that 80% of households outside Quebec and British Columbia that were subject to the carbon tax were receiving more money from the rebate than they were paying. They were benefiting from the system. There is a good reason why the OECD condemned the decision to eliminate the carbon tax.

We must admit that this was a politically savvy election-time decision, because it cut the ground from under Pierre Poilievre, who had spent months making the carbon tax his number one issue. Thanks to lies and repeated slogans, the public came to believe that the carbon tax was bad for their budgets and that it was basically the root of all evil. There were claims that food banks were swamped and that requests for MAID had shot up because of the carbon tax. That is how far people went in the 44th Parliament. That is quite the feat.

The other great feat is the government's ability to renege on its climate action commitments. That came as a real shock to me. I thought that it was very savvy of the Liberals to say they would eliminate the carbon tax and that they were going to win the election, since they had stripped Pierre Poilievre of his only argument. I thought that, after the election, they would announce another massive action plan to fight climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but no. After the election, they talked about building oil pipelines from one end of the country to the other. It was not merely an election strategy. They really were reneging on their greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.

Within six months, all of the fundamental values that Quebeckers hold dear have been swept aside. The fight against climate change is no longer a priority. Money is what matters most. There is money to be made transporting oil from one end of Canada to the other. The Liberals do not care about the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement, the BAPE, or about environmental requirements. They will shove these pipelines down our throats if they have to. Within six months, we saw a stunning change of course. From an environmental standpoint, the Liberals have turned into Conservatives. I am looking at members on each side of the House, and I do not know which party I am looking at.

The motion we are moving today is quite straightforward. It is a motion for fairness and respect that will also ensure that Quebeckers are no longer taken for a ride. We want to know where the money is coming from, we want a budget, but we have not been given answers. Billions of dollars in tax cuts are being announced, but we do not know where that is going to come from. The challenge against Bill 21 at the Supreme Court of Canada has already racked up $1 million in costs in just a few months, and there is no transparency on that. I think we have earned the right to feel fed up and to demand respect.

We are asking that Quebeckers be reimbursed $814 million, which corresponds to their contribution to the amount paid to the rest of Canada for the phoney carbon tax rebate. It is a motion for fairness and respect that makes a lot of sense, and I do not understand why my colleagues in the other parties do not support it. That is the least we owe to the Quebeckers who elected us.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for Shefford.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Drummond, who was obviously so clear in what he said that nobody here has any questions for him. That said, I would like to pick up on something he said.

He clearly explained the strategy that was used. During an election, it might seem like a good idea to promise cheques. The election was a convenient time to eliminate the carbon tax and promise a cheque.

This cost the Liberals in terms of economic credibility, however. I am not the only one saying so. Even the Hon. Lloyd Axworthy, whom I met at an event last night, criticized the Liberals' current lack of economic credibility.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Shefford, and I look forward to hearing her speech in a few minutes.

I, too, was surprised by this stunt, and I recognized it as one at the time. I even told the people around me that the Liberals were doing this to cut the ground from under the Conservatives. However, I thought they would come back with something else, since it is not in the Liberals' nature to not at least pretend to be active in the fight against climate change.

That did not happen. As I was saying at the end of my speech, here we are after the election, which the Liberals probably won partly because of this election ploy, and we see them promoting pipeline investment projects that rely on ignoring environmental assessments and provincial and Quebec requirements.

It makes no sense. Even the OECD denounced the government's decision. Their lack of credibility is now blatant. It is literally the Liberals' fault. To fix their credibility problem, they are going to have to implement concrete measures to fight climate change for real.