Debates of June 10th, 2025

Opposition Motion—Canada Carbon Rebate and Payment to Quebec

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his clarification on the comment he made earlier.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind my colleague that there are francophones across Canada, not just in Quebec. There are francophones in Ontario. My colleague asked me why members from Quebec are not speaking. Are francophones from outside Quebec not francophones?

That is my question for my colleague.

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, again, it is about binoculars. I cannot see the CN Tower from here. I cannot see the CN Tower from my riding.

The government divided Canadians, rolled back the CMA data and classified my riding as not being rural but part of Toronto. Again, we cannot see the CN Tower. We were denied the rural top-up we were entitled to. Now, people who mistakenly got the rural top-up have the CRA coming after them.

Could the hon. member circle the square that people in downtown Ottawa and in downtown Toronto received the rural top-up, as per my OPQ question, but the people of York—Simcoe did not?

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and I are often on flights together, so he knows that I am not from Toronto or another big city. I am from London, Ontario, and I think 30% of my riding is also considered rural. I do speak for a large number of Canadians who are from my riding.

I also want to say that, when it comes to dividing Canadians on this issue, it was the Conservatives who created the dividing language around the carbon tax, to the point that it became so divisive for Canadians that we had to drop it.

The hon. member needs to be talking to his leader about the language he has used in the House to divide Canadians more than he needs to ask me about that.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the deputy House leader sharing such good comments today. I know that the member opposite did stand up on relevance, but I do believe that Bill C-4 is very relevant to this conversation.

In the riding of Waterloo, constituents want to be reassured that the government will continue to fight climate change, because we know that climate change is real. As I said yesterday, all members in the House seem to believe it, except for the official opposition, for whom I guess the jury is still out. They have not seen that the environment is changing and that we need to do something about it.

I would ask the member to share, because we both come from southwest Ontario, the benefits of ensuring that we take the environment seriously. Are the benefits to climate change and economic policy ensuring economic drivers or jobs for tomorrow?

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are keeping the industrial carbon pricing, which is three times more effective than the consumer carbon pricing.

First of all, we have to talk about the fact that Canada has been a leader at home and internationally on climate change, and it will continue to be. Instead of rewarding the biggest polluters and making Canadians pay for our new climate plan, we will build more green jobs. Our area, that of my colleague and I, has new jobs in the green sector for the EV sector. That is something we want to continue to work on to make sure that green jobs are kept across the country.

We are the government that believes in climate change and the real threats of climate change. If members want to go outside, they can see it. We will continue to do so.

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in today's debate and to reiterate our government's plan outlining oru immediate priorities to make life affordable for all Canadians, including Quebeckers.

I want to thank the voters of Les Pays-d'en-Haut for placing their trust in me. As a member from Quebec, I think it is important for some of my colleagues from another political party to remember that Quebeckers elected 44 Liberal members to the House of Commons. This is a historic accomplishment because it is the highest number of Liberals elected to the House since 1980 and, I should point out, it is twice the number of Bloc Québécois members elected to the House.

Quebeckers have quite simply given this government a strong mandate to fight unjustified tariffs, build a strong economy and make life more affordable. We also know that protecting the environment and economic growth are important priorities for Quebeckers. Instead of seeing those noble objectives as mutually exclusive, Quebeckers have long understood that they go hand in hand. Quebec has in fact long been a leader in fighting climate change. In 2013, Quebec established its own cap-and-trade system in order to set a price on carbon pollution. Quebec controls the design of the system and all of its revenues, which is why Canada's carbon rebate never applied in Quebec and why Quebec never expected to receive a carbon rebate. Quebec's leadership in establishing a cap-and-trade system not only predates the federal carbon pricing, it also served as a model for other jurisdictions in North America. Its ties with California through the Western Climate Initiative show that provinces can take the initiative on innovative cross-border climate solutions.

The government will always support provinces that take ambitious, innovative and responsible action to fight climate change, as Quebec did. That is why I find the Bloc Québécois motion a bit ironic. On this side of the House, we respect and appreciate the provinces and territories that have implemented their own climate policies and are aligned with our shared goal of fighting climate change. The existing system is a recognition of Quebec's unique leadership on this issue and its jurisdiction. The Bloc will surely agree with that. The rebates that applied to the federal carbon tax, which has now been cancelled, were sent to Canadians living in provinces that were part of the existing plan. Canadians in those provinces would have budgeted for that rebate, and the government decided to make things easier for them.

It is important to understand how carbon pricing works. It does not apply in provinces like Quebec that have their own carbon pricing system. In provinces where the federal system applied, all proceeds from consumer carbon pricing were returned to the province in which they has been collected. In those provinces, Canadians paid the fuel tax up until a few weeks before the final rebate was sent out. They rightfully expected to receive the final carbon tax rebate in April.

That is why the final Canada carbon rebate was issued as a transitional measure after the elimination of the consumer fuel tax. The payment was not a new benefit. It was the final instalment of a rebate for costs associated with the federal fuel tax. Quebec did not pay the federal carbon tax, so it did not receive the federal rebate. That makes perfect sense.

This situation is not unique to Quebec. The carbon rebate system did not apply in British Columbia or the territories either. People in those provinces and territories were also not entitled to the rebate. This seems to me to be a relatively simple and straightforward premise. I have a lot of respect for my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois, especially when it comes to environmental issues. However, motions like this one seek to sow division where there is none. The federal government has respected Quebec's jurisdiction over cap and trade and has worked with Quebec on environmental issues and carbon pricing.

However, the other side of this mutually beneficial relationship was simply that Quebeckers did not pay the federal carbon tax as a consumption tax. It makes no sense for refund cheques to be sent to Quebec households, since they were exempt from the system in the first place.

Quebeckers want all of the parties in this House to unite, rather than focus on motions that sow discord. They have asked us to put aside our partisan differences and stand up for Quebec industries, Quebec workers and a strong Quebec economy as part of a strong and united Canadian economy.

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

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague, who is the first Liberal member from Quebec to have the courage to rise in the House. However, I am not sure whether he fully understands his government's decision.

As he said, Quebec is not subject to the carbon tax. Considering that we did not pay the carbon tax, we are not entitled to the rebate. However, in April, May and June, when there was no carbon tax, Ottawa still sent out cheques. This means that Quebeckers paid for the elimination of the carbon tax in Canada. That is what it amounts to. It means that the people in my colleague's riding paid $10 million out of their own pockets to people making less of an effort to fight climate change.

Is my colleague going to explain that to his constituents? I think it might not go down very well.

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

Mr. Speaker, after listening to the debates in the House, it seems a bit ironic to hear the Bloc Québécois say that eliminating the carbon tax is an election ploy.

In Quebec, people received zero dollars in carbon tax rebates because they were not participating in the carbon tax program, yet they still elected twice as many Liberal MPs as Bloc MPs.

I think Quebeckers get it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Liberals on their decision to adopt the Conservative policy of axing the consumer carbon tax. This was not easy for the Liberals, who opposed it for so many years. It was clear to us that it was a tax plan, not an environmental plan. It was a burden being imposed on people.

Will the Liberals admit that the industrial carbon tax continues to be a burden, not only on industry, but also on Canadians?

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important to understand that climate change is very real and that the carbon tax is an important measure to fight climate change.

Unfortunately, the debate on the carbon tax for individuals became so toxic that the measure was no longer useful. We abolished it because that is what all Canadians wanted.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Les Pays-d'en-Haut for his excellent speech, which has provided some necessary clarification on the issues being discussed today.

He ended his speech by saying that rather than trying to discuss a motion that is somewhat divisive, we should focus on the issues of the day, such as the need to strengthen and unify our economy.

How will our government's plan to strengthen the economy help his region?

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the measures being put forward by our government, such as the tax cut, the GST rebate on new homes and the other initiatives that have been mentioned, will give the people of Les Pays‑d'en‑Haut a bit of break when it comes to affordability.

I think these flagship measures from our government will pay off.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate once again that while Quebeckers did not pay the carbon tax in April, May and June, neither did any Canadians. However, Quebeckers and British Columbians were the only ones who did not get a cheque for those three months. It is simple. That is the only thing we want. That money was not taken from the carbon tax. It was given to everyone but Quebeckers.

We just want our fair share, which would include $10 million for my colleague's riding.

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers did not pay the carbon tax. They are therefore not entitled to the rebate. The same goes for British Columbia and the territories. It is very clear that they are not entitled to a rebate.

I think that our colleague from Winnipeg North said it well. While budgeting for the year, vulnerable people in the rest of Canada were counting on getting this carbon rebate. That is what our government did today.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the House that I will be sharing my time with the member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

The subject of today's Bloc Québécois motion is a good example of the injustices that Quebec is subjected to because we are a distinct nation governed by another nation. For example, the federal language policy uses our tax dollars and its overriding legislative power to impose the language of the Canadian majority on the people of Quebec.

The same goes for environmental policy. Quebec's environmental policy and its economy are based on renewable energy, whereas Canada is a petrostate. In fact, Canada is already a conventional energy superpower. It is the world's fourth-largest oil producer and fifth-largest gas producer. The Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, also known as the carbon tax, put a price on fossil fuels in eight provinces that did not already have their own carbon pricing system.

Quebec and British Columbia were excluded because of their respective systems: a carbon exchange in Quebec and a provincial carbon tax in British Columbia. Canadian consumers paid the tax when they purchased gas or natural gas. The tax was built into the product price. Individuals in the provinces subject to the carbon tax received a rebate cheque in advance of what they would be paying at the pump. The Canada carbon rebate was paid out to individuals four times per year before the tax was collected. In fact, 90% of the revenues collected from the carbon tax were directly redistributed to residents in the form of rebates every three months. The remaining 10% were invested in energy transition programs. Those rebates were intended to fund the federal policy that most effectively produced real greenhouse gas emission reductions and truly helped decarbonize the economy.

The Liberal Prime Minister, before he was even elected, decided to abolish the carbon tax, an important climate policy from his own party, for purely political reasons. The government eliminated consumer carbon pricing as of April 1, 2025, and doled out the carbon rebate, even if people were no longer paying the carbon tax, as an election goody. This is a great example of the elastic ethics of the Liberals, who are masters in the art of buying votes with voters' own money. Since the carbon tax does not apply to Quebec, which has had its own carbon exchange since 2013, it decided not to give Quebeckers anything. However, these election goodies distributed to the Canadian provinces, to the tune of $3.7 billion, were paid for with federal funds, meaning by all taxpayers, including Quebec taxpayers. Quebeckers should have received $814 million for it to have been equitable.

It was quite the feat by the Liberal Prime Minister. Not only did he sabotage the Liberals' own climate policy, he also managed to create economic and financial injustice for Quebec consumers and taxpayers. He is using Quebeckers' own money to punish them for their good behaviour and their climate responsibility. Quebec is simply being penalized for its efforts to fight climate change.

The Quebec National Assembly voted unanimously in favour of a motion calling on all federal political parties to commit to giving Quebec back its fair share of the payment, which it estimates to be over $800 million. All members of all the political parties represented in Quebec voted in favour of that motion. That is not to mention the price that Quebeckers pay for the effects of the greenhouse gases emitted in Canada outside Quebec. We learned just today that Quebec, like other northern regions, is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, with considerable harm to health and infrastructure, and that is related to the western continent.

I should add that Canada's abandonment of carbon pricing threatens Quebec's economy. This comes at a time when we need to diversify our export markets more than ever, and at a time when Europe is imposing a carbon border adjustment system on products from irresponsible countries such as Canada. Quebec accounts for one third of trade between Canada and Europe and attracts close to 40% of European investment in Canada. Quebec has a clear strategic advantage. In a way, it is a bridge between North America and Europe.

The Bloc Québécois would like to see Quebec double its trade with Europe, including the United Kingdom, from $42 billion to $84 billion within five years. The European Union adopted Regulation (EU) 2023/956 establishing a carbon border adjustment mechanism at the European Union's borders in 2023.

In order to prevent carbon leakage and unfair competition, Europe will be imposing a tax adjustment on certain imported products from countries with no or low carbon pricing starting January 1, 2026. The United Kingdom adopted similar legislation in 2024, and it will come into force on January 1, 2027. When a product enters Europe, the European Union will impose an import tax equivalent to what the carbon pricing would have cost had it been manufactured in Europe.

Carbon adjustment is new, but border tax adjustments are common and in line with trade rules. Let us consider that the World Bank has identified 73 carbon pricing mechanisms in 53 countries. That is 69 more mechanisms than 20 years ago, and no country in the world has abolished carbon pricing, except Canada, which is the first to choose this path.

The carbon market system in Quebec allows us to trade carbon credits with companies in California and Washington State. In a world where pollution is increasingly costly, Quebec enjoys a clear comparative advantage thanks to its abundant production of zero-emission energy.

The Liberal government abolished carbon pricing for individuals in Canada outside Quebec and is proposing to reform industrial carbon pricing, but it is not providing any further details. If it decides to abolish it, it will further undermine efforts to diversify exports and increase trade with Europe.

Canada can still choose the energy transition, sustainable growth and economic and environmental sustainability. We are asking all members to support our motion calling on the government to pay Quebec, without conditions, an amount equivalent to its contribution to the $3.7 billion in spending, estimated at $814 million. That would be a step in the right direction toward rebuilding public trust in justice for all in the fight against climate change.

We have to start by respecting Quebec consumers, taxpayers and citizens by responding positively to the unanimous request of their elected representatives in the Quebec National Assembly. The Bloc Québécois's request is nothing but a modest request to correct an obvious and specific injustice.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize right at the get-go that the Province of British Columbia and the Province of Quebec were not part of the backstop that had the federal government participating in the consumer carbon tax. The new Prime Minister and the new government have made a decision to get rid of the consumer carbon tax, but we still understand the importance of having the industrial carbon pricing system. Let us be very clear on that, because we understand the global market and the critical role that has to play in it. It is only the Conservative Party of Canada that has decided to dunk its head in the sand.

My question for the member is this: Would he not agree that we should be focusing on trying to reverse the Conservative position in regard to the industrial carbon pricing, because it is in the best interest of all of Canada to do so?

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we obviously agree that industrial carbon pricing should be maintained, because it is very important. However, my colleague missed the point.

In this case, the Liberals decided to hand out election goodies for electoral purposes, as they tend to do. In this case, we are talking about a total of $3.7 billion taken from government funds. Quebec taxpayers ended up paying for the Liberals' election goodies without receiving any compensation.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are pleased with the deathbed conversion the Liberals had in cancelling the carbon tax, but Canadians are left with a carbon tax hangover because what the Liberals neglected to do was include a mechanism requiring prices to come down. Instead, the marketers have left prices for groceries the way they are instead of taking into account the reduced carbon tax. The Liberals also left the industrial carbon tax in place.

My question for the member who just spoke is this: Should there be a mechanism to ensure that Canadians do feel the full benefit of getting rid of the carbon tax, and by how much does the member expect the industrial carbon tax to reduce forest fires in Quebec?

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, we take the opposite view. The carbon tax should not have been eliminated. It should have been maintained.

We shall see what happens with industrial carbon pricing. There was nothing about it in the Liberals' recent bill, but we hope that something will be done. In all honesty, if the industrial tax is not maintained or even increased, that will hinder our trade diversification with Europe.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the debate since this morning. Clearly, the Liberals are having a hard time understanding. They are the ones who wrote these election cheques. There seems to be some confusion; they do not seem to understand the process. During debate, after the member for Beloeil—Chambly asked a question, it was clear that even the Liberal leader does not understand the system.

This taxation is upstream, that is, it happens on the front end. People receive money even though they have not paid the tax yet. When the government gives money to people even though they have not paid the tax yet, it does not take an economics expert to understand that this money comes from everyone's taxes, from the public budget. Quebeckers have collectively paid for this election gift, but we are excluded from receiving a cheque because we have our own system.

What does my colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île have to say about that?

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague.

Canadian citizens stopped paying the carbon tax as of April 1, which means that their rebates were just vote-getting handouts.

Earlier, one of my fellow MPs from Quebec said that no one in Quebec asked to be reimbursed, but he is unaware that there has been a lot of talk about this situation in the media. The Quebec National Assembly even voted unanimously in favour of a motion in this regard. Even Liberal MNAs agreed that it was inconceivable that the federal government was handing out election goodies paid for in part by Quebeckers, who received no compensation.

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

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—

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I must interrupt the debate.

The hon. member will have approximately four and a half minutes to conclude, following this afternoon's vote.

Tragedy at Lapu-Lapu Day Festival

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour the lives lost in the devastating attack at the Lapu-Lapu Day festival just six weeks ago in my riding of Vancouver Kingsway. Eleven innocent people were taken from us by the horrific act of violence that occurred as Filipino Canadians gathered to proudly celebrate their history, culture and achievements. To the loved ones of the victims, all who were affected and the entire Filipino Canadian community, our nation stands with them in this time of unspeakable grief and sorrow.

Much has been said about the profound resilience and faith of the Filipino people. While that is truly the case, we must ensure that they get the resources and justice they need and deserve. In the wake of this tragedy, let us come together, not just to recover but to forge a stronger and more united country where everyone is safe, supported and cherished.

Portuguese Heritage Month

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, olá. As the member of Parliament for Davenport, the riding with the largest number of Portuguese Canadians, I am proud to rise in the House today to celebrate Portugal Day in Canada and to celebrate June as Portuguese Heritage Month.

It has been 72 years since the first group of Portuguese immigrants arrived at Pier 21 in Halifax. Today, Portuguese Canadians are almost half a million strong, representing one of the largest Portuguese diasporas in the world. Living in communities across our fair country, Portuguese Canadians are leaders in every single sector: business, politics, science, sports, arts, health care, construction and so much more. Through their perseverance and hard work, they have enriched Canadian society and transformed Canada into a stronger and better country.

I invite all members of the House and all Canadians to join in the celebrations today and every day this month, whether it is by listening to fado, drinking vinho verde or eating a bifana or pastéis de nata.

Feliz Dia de Portugal. Feliz mês de Portugal.