Debates of June 10th, 2025

Opposition Motion—Food Inflation and Budgetary Policy

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

It being 3:04 p.m., the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of the member for Calgary East relating to the business of supply.

Call in the members.

The question is as follows. Shall I dispense?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

[Chair read text of motion to House]

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

Vote #5

Business of Supply

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I declare the motion lost.

I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded division, Government Orders will be extended by 13 minutes.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Canada Carbon Rebate and Payment to Quebec

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I mentioned earlier that, for first nations, decisions must be made with the next seven generations in mind. This idea motivates young people. With all due respect, I would like to suggest this: Perhaps we should replace you in your role as Speaker with an 18-year-old man or woman to remind us of the importance of this mindset. That would be an important symbol. In addressing the Chair, we would also be addressing the next seven generations. Perhaps this would make us aware of how important it is to think about the future, about the young people of tomorrow.

In committing this injustice, the government also made a decision. It decided to axe a tax program that was designed to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels. As we know, the most effective means are coercive means, and the carbon tax was another way to make people think about tomorrow, the future and our planet. Are all environmental policies perfect? The answer is no, and that is normal. However, the Quebec government's carbon exchange has been going on for a dozen years now. That means it is a success; it must be rewarded.

Some progress depends on developing technology, so it makes sense to revisit our policies. Decisions can change or evolve. I am from a remote region, so I understand the challenges of electric vehicles. Keeping hybrid vehicles around a little longer makes sense to me. That is one of the adjustments we can look at. Expanding our network of charging stations and working on making them available everywhere is certainly part of the solution. Basically, some challenges demand adaptation. We have to do it with an awareness of where we are going.

Climate change is no joke. It is real. Building more pipelines and relying more on natural gas will not improve the fate of our planet.

Quebec has been a pioneer. We set up a cap‑and‑trade system for greenhouse gas emissions to fight climate change in 2013. This system was then linked to California's system in 2014 to create North America's largest carbon market. Not everything is perfect, but we are steadily moving in the right direction. This carbon market has helped Quebec show that it is possible to cut greenhouse gas emissions while having minimal impact on consumers' wallets. However, instead of being rewarded, Quebec is now being punished for adopting a forward‑thinking and responsible climate policy.

Canada's willingness to abandon its climate policies will also have an impact on market diversification. While we are told that our dependence on the United States is harmful, Europe is moving toward greener policies and carbon pricing. The European Union plans to impose a carbon adjustment mechanism starting in 2026 and 2027. This policy will allow certain products from countries with no or low industrial carbon pricing to be taxed at the border, similar to customs duties. As a result, Quebec products such as aluminum, iron and steel could be slapped with new customs duties because of Canada's inaction.

In conclusion, we need a climate policy that recognizes and respects Quebec's efforts. By penalizing Quebeckers, who contributed to this rebate, Ottawa is sending the message that being at the forefront of climate action is not a good thing.

This debate is not just a matter of fairness; it is a matter of respect for the Quebec nation and its choices.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member is being somewhat misleading. Whether it is British Columbia or Quebec, we have looked at those two provinces and admired the leadership role they have played in dealing with the environment. This has nothing to do with punishing either Quebec or British Columbia.

I want to pick up on the point about the global markets, because it is very important to recognize that the government has not given up on industrial carbon pricing, in good part because of the whole global market issue. The European Union potentially putting tariffs on products from another nation where there is no pollution controls is very real.

I am wondering if the member could expand on that point as to why it is so critically important that we do have the—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I have to interrupt the parliamentary secretary.

The member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would really like the member for Winnipeg North to tell us, following his intervention, what he thinks about the environment commissioner's report, which says that Canada's climate change adaptation strategy is missing essential elements and is progressing slowly.

The government got rid of the carbon tax, a coercive measure that was working. Everyone got money, except Quebec. The principle of one economy does not include Quebec, I guess. There is no vision. There is noise, but no results and little meaningful action.

I would like to know what he thinks of his colleague from Laval—Les Îles, who comes here full of arrogance, and the response from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, who says that because we in Quebec want an equitable measure, we are trying to have it both ways.

We are the victims in this system. This has to change or we are going to have to get the hell out of dodge.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I am not sure that the member's final words were exactly parliamentary, but we will move on. The member should perhaps avoid using such words in the House.

The hon. member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the remarks of Bloc Québécois members concerning election goodies handed out during election campaigns. It is exasperating and probably an abuse of power.

Is the Liberals' reversal on the carbon tax a change of heart or an abandonment of their principles, assuming they even have principles?

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge that different places in Canada have different visions and that Quebec's policy works. What is the point of penalizing a government for taking bold action that works and that allows for cap and trade with California? There is a return to be made there. If we do the math, we easily come up with $814 million that could be invested in a variety of programs in Quebec. It does not necessarily need to be sent to individuals.

Because of its negligence, especially in governance matters, the federal government suspended funding to SDTC. We are aware of the scandal that occurred, but the impact of this is damaging to Quebec and to technological innovation in this area.

Ultimately, who benefits? Once again, it is the oil companies.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I have a point of order from the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, you had somewhat warned the member. I think more than a warning is necessary, given the language that was used in his previous answer. I would ask him to apologize. The type of word that was used is definitely inappropriate.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I ask the member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue to withdraw the last few words he used.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat hesitant. Out of respect for your position, I will do it, but I believe that this is how Quebeckers feel. For me, it is—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

That is all I needed. I really appreciate that the member withdrew his comments.

The hon. member for Côte‑du‑Sud—Rivière‑du‑Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata.

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

Mr. Speaker, this morning we tabled a potential amendment to the Bloc Québécois motion. When I asked the member for Rimouski—La Matapédia a question, he responded by talking about respect for provincial jurisdiction.

We obviously respect provincial jurisdiction. I would nevertheless like to hear the opinion of my colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue on the motion we moved this morning.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my Conservative colleague for mentioning the importance of respect for provincial jurisdictions. We have not always felt that same level of respect from the Conservatives on this specific issue over the years, but that was in a previous Parliament.

The government is coming in with a new attitude, but there is indeed one issue that has been overplayed. Seeing the consequences this can have on farmers, it is obvious that they are playing politics in an area that should not be politicized. It took the Conservatives a long time to recognize that Quebec has a carbon exchange and that the carbon tax did not apply in Quebec.

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to thank the people of my riding, Beauport—Limoilou. I want to mention that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.

I am pleased to take part in today's debate and to reiterate the immediate priorities of our government to make life more affordable for all Canadians, including Quebeckers. The Canada carbon rebate was implemented to return the majority of direct proceeds from the federal fuel charge to residents of provinces where it applied. It did not apply in Quebec.

The emissions reduction plan contains a complete suite of mitigation measures, strategies and investments, including policies that complement carbon pricing. A price on pollution for major emitters will continue to be a pillar of Canada's plan to build a prosperous net-zero economy and make progress on climate objectives.

The government intends to refocus federal carbon pollution pricing standards on ensuring that carbon pricing systems are in place across the country on a broad range of greenhouse gas emissions from industry. It will reinforce Canada's approach to carbon pricing for industry to ensure its continued effectiveness.

The federal government intends to work with the provinces, including Quebec, the territories, indigenous peoples and stakeholders on changes to the minimum national stringency standards for carbon pollution pricing, known as the federal “benchmark” criteria.

The changes would ensure that industrial pricing systems continue to maximize emissions reductions and encourage the transition to low-carbon technology, while protecting industry against competitiveness and carbon leakage impacts. By improving its emissions performance, Canadian industry will become more efficient and maintain its competitive edge as Canada works to diversify its trade relationships and deepen its market access, particularly in jurisdictions that, like the European Union, increasingly value low-emissions goods. The goal of the benchmark criteria would continue to be that systems are similarly stringent, fair and effective.

The review will look at opportunities to strengthen industrial carbon markets to provide the necessary incentives for major industry-wide decarbonization projects, while creating jobs and spurring investments in the technologies that will shape the clean economies of tomorrow.

Thanks to the elimination of the federal fuel charge effective April 1, 2025, eligible Canadians received a final Canada carbon rebate payment on April 22. The government decided to make this final carbon rebate payment to eligible households in April since Canadian families in the provinces subject to the federal fuel charge, especially low-income families, were counting on the April rebate.

Last week, we introduced Bill C‑4, which would officially remove consumer carbon pricing from Canadian law once it is repealed. This bill would also reduce the cost of living so that Canadians, including Quebeckers, can keep more of their paycheques to spend on what matters most to them. It includes a middle-class tax cut effective July 1, tax relief for close to 22 million individuals in Canada and $840 in savings per year for two-income families. As we have also clearly stated, this cut will primarily benefit the hard-working Canadians who need it the most.

The bulk of the relief would go to people in the two lowest tax brackets, those earning less than $114,750 in 2025. Within this group of working Canadians, nearly half of the tax savings would go to those in the lowest tax bracket, those earning $57,375 or less in 2025. We can deliver these tax savings quickly to Canadians because, when our middle-class tax cut was announced, the Canada Revenue Agency updated its source deduction tables for the July to December 2025 period so that employers and payroll administrators can reduce tax withholdings starting July 1.

We will also eliminate the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes up to $1 million, which will save them up to $50,000. We will cut the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million. This will result in a significant increase in the already substantial federal tax support available 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.

This will help more young people and families achieve their dream of home ownership. Thanks to these measures, we are making changes to lower taxes, we are lowering costs and we are putting more money in the pockets of Canadians and Quebeckers. Those are just some of the ways the government is making life more affordable. The government will also maintain the programs that are already helping families save thousands of dollars every year.

As His Majesty said in the Speech from the Throne, in all of our actions, the government will be guided by a new fiscal discipline: spend less so people can invest more. We will balance the government's operating budget over the next three years by cutting waste, capping the public service, ending duplication and deploying technology to improve public sector productivity. That is why we are committed to presenting the details of our plan in the fall in a comprehensive, effective, ambitious and prudent federal budget.

One of the key priorities that we have discussed and focused on since the start of our mandate is to improve the efficiency of government spending. We are looking for areas where we can cut costs and improve public service productivity.

Day-to-day government spending, that is, the government's operating budget, has been growing by 9% each year. The government will introduce measures to bring that growth below 2%. In parallel, the government will take a series of measures to catalyze new investment to create better jobs and higher incomes for Canadians.

As we have already mentioned, the government's overarching goal and core mission is to build the strongest economy in the G7. That starts with creating one Canadian economy out of 13. Internal barriers to trade and labour mobility cost Canadians as much as $200 billion each year. That is why we have introduced legislation to remove all remaining federal barriers to internal trade and labour mobility.

Our government is working hard right now to meet Canadians' needs, and that includes making life more affordable across the country, including in Quebec, so that Canadians can keep more of their hard-earned paycheques.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his speech.

He said that Quebec cannot get a refund for the carbon tax because it has its own system. I did not realize that having an independent system meant that we will not be treated fairly. We are going to have to sort something out. The carbon tax refund was supposed to be paid out on April 22, but the tax was abolished on April 1. The finance department simplified things by saying that the refund of the infamous carbon tax was for the period from April 1 to June. How can the government refund something that was never collected? Quebeckers pay taxes to the federal government, unless my colleague can prove otherwise. If a refund is being given for something that was never paid, it is only fair that we ask for our fair share.

I would like my colleague to tell me what he thinks of the unanimous decision by the 125 members of the Quebec National Assembly to demand that Ottawa reimburse Quebeckers their $814 million. Does he think those MNAs are liars or just idiots?

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his many questions. I will try to answer them as best I can.

As he said, something that has never been paid cannot be reimbursed. What is clear is that Quebec has never participated in the Canadian carbon exchange. It created its own carbon exchange, and we respected its provincial autonomy. As my colleague put it so well, something that has never been paid cannot be reimbursed.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his speech on the carbon tax.

I would like to ask him, as he is a new member of the House, how he feels about running on the idea and platform of a carbon tax, only to come to the House and find out the carbon tax has been axed, as in the Conservative platform. Is that something he can now defend to his constituents?

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians wanted a climate policy that transcends political division, and we listened. From day one, we eliminated consumer carbon pricing, which has already lowered fuel costs for Canadian families. We are maintaining industrial carbon pricing, which is three times more effective than consumer carbon pricing.