Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your appointment to the chair. This is the first time I have had the opportunity to speak to you inyour new role. I am very happy for you.
I also want to use my first official speech to thank the people of Abitibi—Témiscamingue for their trust in me. Despite some headwinds, that trust remains strong. I was able to hold on to roughly the same amount of support from the voters in my riding, and I am very grateful to them. I especially want to thank to my campaign team, starting with Gérard, Benjamin, Lynda, Christian, Jean-François, and anyone else I may have forgotten to mention. They have my sincere thanks.
Allow me to set the stage a little.
A few months ago, the federal government scrapped the carbon tax. Canadian consumers were paying something called the federal fuel charge. The tax did not apply to Quebec because of Quebec's carbon market. Four times a year, Canadian consumers received the Canada carbon rebate, which ranged from $200 to $450. The rebate was not a big deal for the Bloc Québécois. However, the same cannot be said of the cheque sent out during the election campaign. Why is that? The thing is, this particular rebate cheque was funded by all Quebeckers and all Canadians, and that is the crux of the problem.
According to columnist Hélène Buzzetti, the rebate has always been prospective, not retroactive, meaning that it was meant to cover what people were going to pay in tax over the next three months. She reported that, according to the Finance Canada website, “Payments delivered to Canadians in April would thus return the fuel charge proceeds collected during the April-June quarter”.
As such, the April rebate was paid for with government funds. In other words, it was everyone's money, including Quebeckers' money, that paid for the rebate.
That is what is so unfair about this. Quebeckers and British Columbians did not receive any federal carbon rebate at all. They did not get a single cheque.
In total, those payments cost taxpayers $3.75 billion, including a substantial portion, estimated at more than $800 million, that should have gone to Quebec in accordance with the rule of three.
Why should the people of Quebec be excluded from a program that they contributed to financially? That is the question. What is the justification for excluding them like this?
The answer we got is that federal pricing is of no concern to Quebec since it has had its own carbon market in partnership with California since 2013. What is more, I congratulate Quebec because that system yields the best results worldwide. Our system still exists more than 10 years later, proving how robust and effective it is.
This final rebate applies only to residents of the rest of Canada, but that is the problem: The residents of the rest of Canada did not pay for this rebate. All taxpayers paid for it, contrary to what the Prime Minister says.
I am not here to create division, but to point out that this injustice needs to be corrected. Quebec is not asking for special treatment. It is simply asking that Quebeckers be treated the same way Canadians are. We want to receive our fair share of what we paid since we have made commendable and much more effective efforts than other people in Canada have.
I would also like to point out that the Quebec National Assembly adopted a motion on April 23 calling on the federal government to give Quebec its fair share of the carbon rebate. This was not a partisan request. It represented the voice of all parties in the Quebec National Assembly. What was the federal government's response? It was basically an outright refusal.
To make it easier for the federal government to correct this injustice toward Quebeckers, there is no need to send cheques directly to them. The federal government could instead pay the Quebec government its fair share. The Quebec government could then decide how best to redistribute this money to Quebeckers.
Perhaps this money could be go toward other measures to promote innovation and the fight against climate change and carbon emissions. The Quebec government could grant this amount as a rebate on gasoline taxes for the next year, which would reduce the price gap between Quebec and Ontario, for example. Quebec has already taken a step in this direction by eliminating the minimum price for gasoline.
The Quebec government could also do more by investing those funds in the environment and energy transition.
I was recently in Amos for an event hosted by the Abitibi—Témiscamingue Youth Forum to encourage young people to participate in municipal elections. These young people are motivated by a desire for change. They are thinking about the future. They are not thinking about short‑term gains. They are concerned about the future of our planet. In first nations communities, decisions must be made with the next seven generations in mind. There is something inspiring about that that I—