Debates of Oct. 6th, 2026

Opposition Motion—Diesel Prices

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Madam Speaker, the recent surge in diesel prices has indeed created real challenges for Canadians. Farmers bringing in this year's harvest are facing higher costs. Trucking companies moving goods across the country are facing higher costs. Businesses that rely on diesel power and equipment are also facing higher costs. When transportation costs rise, Canadians often see those costs reflected in the prices they pay for food and everyday goods.

Diesel prices matter to Canadians. They affect household budgets, businesses, farmers and industries across the country. Understanding what is driving those prices is essential if we want to identify solutions that can make a meaningful difference. That is because we oftentimes misunderstand the problem, and if we do, we end up chasing the wrong solutions.

One of the challenges in this debate is that many different factors affect the price of diesel. Some of those factors are within Canada's influence and others are not. A responsible energy policy begins by understanding the difference. Let us begin with what Canadians can influence. Governments can act to provide relief when Canadians are facing higher costs. That is exactly what the government did.

Earlier this year, the Government of Canada temporarily suspended the federal fuel excise tax on diesel and gasoline. When global pressures persisted, the government extended that relief. That support is expected to provide billions of dollars in relief to Canadians. Members opposite may argue that the relief should go further, and that is a legitimate debate.

One of the central proposals in today's motion is tax relief on diesel. On that point, the government has already acted, but the discussion cannot stop there. That is why the government is collaborating with industry, provinces and territories to identify opportunities for Canada to strengthen the resilience of its fuel system, including for transportation networks, storage capacity and other types of infrastructure.

By working in lockstep with provinces and territories, we can create the conditions to attract investment in the critical energy systems and infrastructure Canadians rely upon every day. Fuel security is not determined solely by how much fuel is produced. It also depends on whether that fuel can reach the communities, farms and businesses that depend upon it. That requires ensuring that pipelines, rail, storage, and strong distribution networks are always in place to ensure access to the energy that Canadians need. This motion recognizes that fuel security is about more than refining capacity alone. The debate is about how best to strengthen those systems and how quickly Canadians can expect to see results.

Now let us consider what Canada cannot control. Canada does not set the global price of crude oil. Canada does not determine global refinery margins. Canada does not control international diesel shortages. Canada does not control wars and geopolitical instability, nor disruptions affecting energy markets around the world. In fact, G7 leaders met virtually on Friday because these challenges are affecting countries around the world, not just Canada, and they agreed to coordinate the release of strategic fuel reserves and diesel in response to pressures affecting global fuel markets.

That is a reminder that many of the forces affecting diesel prices extend well beyond the reach of any single government. All of those events can affect the price that Canadians pay. Of course, recognizing that reality is not an excuse. It is simply an acknowledgement of the facts. The fact is that no federal government, regardless of political stripe, can legislate away global energy price volatility. No government can pass a motion in the House of Commons and eliminate geopolitical risk, and no government can guarantee that international supply disruptions will never occur again. What governments can do is strengthen resilience, reduce vulnerabilities and help Canadians weather disruptions when they occur. That is exactly what the government is focused on doing.

One aspect of today's motion deserves particular attention. The motion proposes expanding diesel production and building additional fuel infrastructure, including refining capacity, transport networks, and storage. I agree. The government agrees that adequate refining capacity remains important to Canada's long-term energy security.

However, it is important to note that Canada already produces more diesel than it consumes. The challenge is not simply how much fuel Canada produces but also ensuring that fuel can move relatively easily and reliably through the systems Canadians depend upon.

If market demand supports additional refining capacity, our government should carefully consider proposals to expand its production, but Canadians also deserve a realistic discussion about what refining capacity can and cannot accomplish. A new refinery cannot be planned, financed, approved and constructed in a matter of months. Projects of that scale take years. Even under optimistic assumptions, they cannot address the affordability challenges Canadians are facing right now.

That does not make them unimportant. It simply means they solve a different problem. They are not primarily about lowering diesel prices this month. They are about making Canada more resilient in the future. Diesel prices are ultimately linked to North American and global fuel markets, so simply adding refining capacity in Canada would not necessarily translate into significantly lower prices for Canadian consumers.

A responsible energy strategy requires both immediate action and long-term planning, not one or the other, and that is exactly the approach the government is taking. First, the government provided relief that Canadians can feel today. Second, it is strengthening the system that will help Canada respond to future disruptions tomorrow.

That broader work is already under way. Global instability and associated volatility in diesel prices reinforces the importance of strengthening resilience of our energy systems. Canada already produces significant amounts of energy, but we should also be looking for ways to move that energy more efficiently across the country. That is why the government has focused on strengthening transportation networks and improving market reliance.

Recent approvals, including the Wolf Midstream project, the Sunrise expansion project and the Taylor to Gordondale project, will strengthen the infrastructure that moves energy and fuels where Canadians need them most. The Pacific link is another recent example of that work. The Government of Canada recently designated the project as one of national interests under the Building Canada Act. It has the potential to strengthen Canada's energy security and diversify our export opportunities.

A resilient country is a better-prepared country. A better-prepared country with energy security is about more than any single project and about more than any single type of fuel. Canada's energy security depends on having reliable conventional fuels, strong transportation networks, adequate storage and, increasingly, abundant clean fuels and clean energy. These are not competing objectives; they strengthen one another.

Reliable diesel remains essential for farmers, truckers, construction workers, mining operations and countless businesses across the country, but Canada's energy security is also strengthened when we produce more reliable alternatives to diesel, such as more clean fuels such as renewable diesel and biodiesel. More supply makes energy systems more resilient, and more options make it more reliable. That is why the Government of Canada has also supported the growth of Canada's biofuel sector.

The goal is to strengthen Canada's domestic production of renewable alternatives to protect Canadians, to build energy security and to add fuel to the market. They complement conventional fuels rather than replace them. More fuel supply strengthens market resilience and reduces pressure on prices. Energy security is strengthened when Canada produces more energy of all kinds. That means more conventional security, more conventional energy, more clean fuels, more clean energy and more resilience. That is how any country can be prepared for uncertainty.

Canadians need relief today. They also need confidence in the future. That means taking action where governments can make a difference and strengthening Canada's energy security over the long term. Our government is doing both. That is the approach Canadians deserve and the approach we will continue to pursue.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Madam Speaker, the member mentioned the Pacific link pipeline and some of the other projects that the federal government has undertaken, but I want to read a quote from the environment minister's website, which says that she has “taken a strong stance against oil sands expansion, and has promoted the critical need for a transition from fossil fuels to a low-carbon economy” and that “She has shared the priorities of local environmental groups with her colleagues in Ottawa.”

With the environment minister's actively telling people that she is against oil sands expansion, how can the member actually stand up and support a pipeline that increases oil production in the oil sands to get out to the west coast?

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Madam Speaker, the question is whether we can do both. Can we walk and chew gum? We need to do both. The fact is that we need to provide clean alternatives within the system as we proceed. There is a demand. We have the resources. Canada's prosperity is dependent upon its ability to provide some of our critical minerals, including fuel and energy from the tar sands.

We are already a huge producer of energy around the world. We will continue to be, and we will continue to provide alternates, including clean energy alternatives.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, here is the thing. All the statements being made by Liberal members about these projects' being so wonderful are premised on the idea that we do not ask questions such as how a particular project diversifies markets. So far, we have wasted $34 billion. The previous government, under Justin Trudeau and former finance minister Bill Morneau, spent $34 billion to build a pipeline, which still has massive objections, across the landscape, but it still has not made enough money in any given year to pay the interest on the debt Canadians took on to build it.

Now, as we are proposing a second one, also built with public money, experts in financial markets are saying there really is not a market for bitumen in other countries, though we are presuming there is one when we do not have any evidence for it.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the fact that we are asking questions. We should always ask questions, and the government should be held accountable to the investments it is making for the future benefit of Canadians.

I will argue, though, that demand does exist. The prosperity and legacy of that demand over a longer period of time of time may dwindle, which is all the more reason we have to look at alternative forms of energy, but Canada has what the world wants. We have heard that many times. The world needs Canada to be at the table to provide some of the resources and trust. Canada is a trusted partner in these endeavours. We are trusted to provide environmental protection as we proceed. We can continue doing both, and we will.

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

Madam Speaker, I want to pick up on the point of short-term and long-term relief. The short-term relief is in Bill C-38, providing the tax break. In the long term, looking at the major projects and recent announcements about Pacific link and LNG phase two, we see that there are projects that can help us into the future.

I am wondering if my colleague can provide his thoughts on why it is important for us to have a balance of both short-term and long-term thinking when it comes to the issue of our natural resources.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Madam Speaker, the point is well taken. The government has a responsibility, a duty and an obligation to Canadians to think beyond election cycles. Short-sightedness is not what is going to make what the Canadian future requires. We have to look long-term. We need to make these investments for the benefit of Canadians and our prosperity. At the same time, we can provide relief in transition to that resilience and reliability that is being invested in these major projects.

It is important that Canadians work together with all provinces and all parties to look at the long term and invest for our future.

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

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my speaking time with the member for York—South Simcoe.

The price of diesel is still extremely high in Quebec this week. For farmers, truck drivers and all the businesses that depend on fuel to survive, this means having to pay hundreds, even thousands of dollars more every day just to be able to keep on working.

Where does every price hike at the pump end up? It ends up as part of their expenses. It ends up making transportation and production costs higher. Eventually, it ends up taking money from families' pockets. We know that diesel, which is what we are talking about today, powers the tractors used to grow our food. It powers the trucks used to transport our purchases far and wide because we do not live next door to the factories. It is also essential for manufacturing. In short, diesel is everywhere in our lives, even if we do not put a single drop into our own vehicles.

When farmers and truck drivers pay more, who ends up footing the bill? It is always Canadians. That is precisely why we, the Conservatives, decided to take action. With the motion we are moving today, we want to introduce and offer an emergency relief plan to bring prices down at the pump for Canadians and Quebeckers right now. We want to produce more fuel here in Canada. We want to better protect our country from future energy crises.

Our plan is simple and has two parts. First, we will save Canadians money by reducing the taxes that are driving up diesel costs. Second, we will increase supply at home by accelerating refining, storage and transportation, while encouraging investment in those areas.

The truth is that the current situation makes no sense. Not many people know this, but Canada has the fourth-biggest oil reserves in the world. We have the resources, we have the workers and we have the know-how.

Unfortunately, after 11 years of Liberal government, Canadians and Quebeckers continue to pay far more for their fuel than they should. A country with such abundant oil resources should be better shielded from energy shocks. We should be increasing production when markets are under pressure, refining more of our own oil, and helping to boost supply so that we can become a true energy power.

However, the opposite has been happening over the past 11 years. Liberal taxes have multiplied, Liberal delays have multiplied, and Liberal bureaucracy has multiplied. As a result, refining, storage and transportation projects still take years to obtain the necessary approvals. Neither Bill C‑5, nor Bill C‑38, nor Bill C‑39, nor any other bill the government may introduce will change the speed at which projects are actually delivered, because these are Liberal bills. Unfortunately, it is all hot air and political theatre, while nothing is really happening.

The Liberals will point to wars, geopolitical tensions and market volatility to explain increases in diesel prices, and they are not wrong. Yes, it is true that these events have an impact on prices, but there is one thing they do not explain: Why are Canadians paying more than Americans? Why are Canadians paying more than the global average price of oil? As far as I know, Americans, along with everyone else in the world, are facing the same wars and the same price volatility. That is the question we should be asking ourselves. Why do we continue to pay more here in Canada, when we have the fourth-biggest oil reserve in the world? Meanwhile, other countries are looking at us and saying that they will not invest in our country.

I agree that the Liberals cannot control what happens abroad. They are having a hard enough time controlling what is going on at home. However, there is something they can do. They can control the taxes they impose on Canadians. They can also remove the barriers, the bureaucracy and the red tape they created here. They had 11 years to strengthen our refining capacity, improve our infrastructure and make Canada less vulnerable. They did not do so.

Who pays for all those wasted years? It is Quebeckers, Canadians, families, the unemployed, people waiting in line at food banks, and young people who have lost hope of ever owning their own home because housing prices have become unaffordable. That is the reality.

Our plan aims to improve the lives of Canadians, young Canadians, and Canadian families. The first part of the plan is to help Canadians save money, as I mentioned.

We propose eliminating all taxes on diesel sales, at least until July 1, 2027. That means extending the excise tax reduction until that date and eliminating the GST on fuel purchases. When Canadians are already paying so much for gas, the government should not keep taking even more from them every time they fill up. It should leave more money in their pockets.

As we saw, it was pressure from the Conservatives that forced the Liberals to suspend the federal fuel excise tax. We asked for this many times, and the Liberals laughed at us. Suddenly, they decide to adopt a Conservative idea. There were even two motions in the House, but they voted against them. In the end, they did it anyway. Recently, they announced that they would keep this measure in place a little longer, but they also officially announced that fuel prices will go up in February and will go up even more in March.

They had already anticipated both increases, and they decided against a 10¢ hike in favour of two five-cent hikes. They figured that it would be less obvious and that Canadians would not notice. However, Canadians are not fooled, especially when they get to the grocery store checkout and see the total.

Today, we are asking the Liberals to go further. We want them to get rid of the taxes that increase the cost of producing diesel, including the industrial carbon tax and the clean fuel regulations. They say they want to make life more affordable. The Prime Minister even said that affordability in Canada is the best it has been in a decade. I have not heard that from anyone in my riding.

I asked my constituents if they felt that life was cheaper than it had been in a decade. I asked them if they felt that they had saved money across the board this year. Everyone said no and that it was the opposite.

The Prime Minister is literally out of touch. I assume he is going to tell his people not to vote in favour of our motion this week, because he does not know just how much families are struggling to make ends meet. That is the reality of an out-of-touch Prime Minister who spends more time flying around burning gas than down here seeing how every family is living and is struggling to pay their bills at the end of the month.

Canadians do not need another explanation or another theatrical announcement. They want their bills reduced, period. We want the price gap with the United States to shrink, and we want to get that done in the next five years. Canada is going to have to increase its diesel production. Its production of other refined fuels is going to have to be ramped up to about a million barrels a day. That is a lot, but we can do it. In fact, we have the capacity to do it: We have the oil, the workers and the know-how. There is no reason to put up with the United States buying our oil at a discount and then selling us diesel at a higher price.

The second part of our plan is to source more domestically. Projects take a long time, and the government slept through the past 11 years. Now it is time to get projects into production faster, cut red tape and avoid supporting bills that stand in the way of these projects.

We were presented with Bill C‑5, which was supposed to fast-track projects at a speed never seen before. However, there has been an 18-month delay, because the Liberals have had to bring in a second bill to do the same thing. They changed one word in the title, but that does not produce more results.

We want to fast-track projects and establish Canada as an energy powerhouse. We want Canadians to be able to save money and have more money in their pockets. That is why we are calling on the House to support our emergency plan to reduce prices at the pump, lower costs for Canadians and Quebeckers, accelerate investments and strengthen our energy security. It is simple: We want to save families money, develop our resources, produce more energy and better protect our country from the next crisis. That is the emergency plan, and we urge the Liberals to support it. I challenge them to do this for Canadians.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Madam Speaker, no one can predict what the price of gas will be one month, three months or six months from now. When the conflict in Iran ends, the expectation is that gas prices will go down.

Why does my colleague not want to help Canadians now, when they really need it, instead of proposing a longer-term measure that will cost taxpayers a lot of money?

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

Madam Speaker, can my colleague predict when the conflict in Iran will end? Can she do that? The answer is no. What the Liberals are telling us is that they will wait and see what happens later. For months and months, they are going to keep taking money out of the pockets of Canadians, and then maybe, when the price of gas and diesel comes down enough, they will decide to do something about it.

We Conservatives are calling for immediate action by maintaining the suspension of the excise tax and eliminating the industrial carbon tax, the clean fuel tax and the GST. These are measures that can be implemented immediately to save Canadians money right away. This is not about predicting the future; it is about the immediate reality that Canadians are actually facing.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my highly esteemed colleague.

The Bloc Québécois proposed a more targeted mechanism in which the excise tax on diesel would be credited for people who use it as an input when the price of diesel in a given quarter exceeds the price from the same quarter of the previous year by a certain number of percentage points. If the rate is set at 20%, for example, a 20% increase in prices compared with the same period in the previous year would automatically result in a refund for businesses and entrepreneurs affected by higher operating costs. This mechanism could be permanent, and it would be extremely easy to fund.

In fact, my friend's leader has always said that he is against corporate welfare. The biggest example of corporate welfare in this country is the oil and gas industry. Hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayers' money are being used to subsidize it. If we got rid of just those subsidies, everyone would be happy, and the Bloc Québécois proposal would lower the price of diesel.

Would my friend support such a proposal?

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

Madam Speaker, I support any proposal that leaves more money in consumers' pockets, but there is one aspect that troubles me. The problem with the approach proposed by my colleague is that it creates more bureaucracy, because people are needed to do the counting and the calculations.

We Conservatives say that all taxes should be suspended quickly, immediately, until Canada Day next July. I understand that it will not be presented that way, but I believe that is the simplest and fastest solution and the one that would require the least paperwork while putting money back into people's pockets right away, especially for those at home who are struggling to pay for groceries.

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

Madam Speaker, I heard something quite surprising from my colleague. He said that the government had implemented a measure to help with the cost of living because of pressure from the Conservatives. If we were to wait for the Conservatives before helping Canadians, there would not have been much help for the past 10 years. Yes, this time, they supported us in suspending the excise tax on gasoline. However, when it came time to vote for the Canada child benefit, to create a national school food program or to offer affordable child care, what did they do? They voted no every time.

My colleague said that he is in favour of putting money back in Canadians' pockets. However, when we look at his voting record, it is quite the opposite. I have a question for him. Since when has he been in favour of implementing measures to help Canadians cope with the cost of living?

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to welcome my colleague. He is fairly new here in the House. I hope he is enjoying his current seat.

That said, he should bear in mind the changes that have taken place over the last few months. They tried to make us believe that the Liberal Party had changed, but it is still the same Liberal Party. It is a party that prefers taxes over leaving more money in people's pockets so that they can make their own choices. It is a party that takes a paternalistic approach. Instead of leaving more money in people's pockets so they can manage it themselves, the Liberal Party would rather tell them what to do. That is the problem with the Liberal Party. It thinks it is just a bit better than everyone else at managing people's money.

We Conservatives believe that if we leave more money in people's pockets, they will be able to pay their grocery bill at the end of the month. That is what is best.

As for the various measures we did not support, I could draw up a list of all the measures that the Prime Minister has decided to swipe from our election platform. I want my colleague to know that I believe we have done far more than he has over the past 10 years to help Canadians.

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

Madam Speaker, “fill her up”. When is the last time we heard that? After all, with diesel prices at record highs, everyday Canadians who drive a truck for work or for personal use are running on fumes and whispering a prayer when they finally pull up to the pump. As a consequence of Liberal economic failures over the past 11 years, Canadians are paying 41¢ more per litre on diesel than the world average price and 32¢ more per litre than Americans. This is driving up the cost for farmers, businesses and families in my communities in York—South Simcoe and right across our great country, especially in rural and remote areas, which make up such a pivotal part of our Canadian way of life.

This does not just affect Canadians who drive a truck. Diesel powers farm equipment that grows our food, machinery that powers our industries and tractor-trailers that deliver goods across the country and beyond. This is why Canada's Conservatives, as the official opposition, have brought forward this motion calling on the government to adopt our emergency fuel relief plan to provide immediate relief to Canadians struggling to afford fuel and faster energy infrastructure approvals for the future.

It has been almost two years to the day since we were in the same place debating a different motion on fuel affordability. At that time, the former Liberal minister for natural resources stood outside these very doors here and said, “They have no view on how to build an economy of the future. Oil and gas will peak this decade. In fact, oil is probably peaking this year, and the economic plan of the Conservative Party of Canada is simply to produce more oil and gas into a market that inevitably, if we are going to fight climate change, will begin to decline.”

The minister went on to say, “That is a ridiculous economic plan for the future of this country. It will leave Canada uncompetitive and poorer on a go-forward basis.... I encourage...the folks who sit on the Conservative benches to at least try to tell the truth.”

The truth hurts. The Liberal government spent 11 years calling Conservatives and Canadians who supported pipeline projects climate deniers. The Liberal members, and I can see the Liberal member for Whitby across there, used the term 67 times in the last Parliament. They spent 11 years telling anyone who wanted to build an energy project that they were on the wrong side of history. It was not about economic viability or the merits of each project. It was all ideological.

While the Liberals were dishing out insults and lecturing Canadians about a net-zero future, they also brought in devastating antidevelopment laws for our country. Conservatives warned that these laws would stop projects from being built, but the Liberals pushed them through anyway. As a result, critical energy investments sorely needed in the country died: 16 major projects worth over $176 billion. Canadians are paying for those failures at the pumps today. Two years ago, the Liberals said that oil was peaking, that the market was headed for decline and that Conservatives who wanted to produce more were ridiculous.

Well, let us look at the market today. The G7 is releasing 100 million barrels from emergency stocks. Diesel is at an all-time record high. The market is not in a decline. This is a market the world actually needed Canada to supply, and the government spent a decade telling us not to build.

Now the Liberals will tell Canadians that the price of diesel is out of their hands and that it is all due to global factors. There is no doubt that the wars in the Middle East and Ukraine have contributed, but why is it that a trucker in America faces those same factors and headlines, yet pays 32¢ a litre less than a trucker in Canada? A big part of that is the projects the Liberals blocked and the taxes they impose on Canadian fuel. They were wrong about the market then, and they are wrong to absolve themselves of responsibility now. They need to reflect on their failures and their ideological vendetta against Canadian energy production, which have led to this situation today.

This is felt across Canada, including in the communities I represent. Just yesterday, I spoke to Garret, a local farmer. He told me that fuel surcharges are showing up everywhere now: on his custom work bills, on harvesting and on every single incoming shipment that he has. Every time costs go up, it comes out of the farmer's pocket, money that would otherwise go to equipment payments and barn repairs. He warned me that this is not just a problem for this season. Next year, it will show up in cropping, in the grain market and in what it costs to move milk and cattle.

We know that when farmers' costs rise, the price of food rises with them. Garret paid $1.10 this same time last year, and just yesterday, he paid $2.28. That is why Conservatives are proposing the emergency relief fuel plan today, not just for our farmers, but for all Canadians.

Canadians need relief now when filling up, and they need the infrastructure that brings costs down for good. We need to eliminate all taxes on diesel sales until at least Canada Day by extending the full excise tax cut until July 1, 2027, and removing the GST from fuel. We would permanently scrap the federal industrial carbon tax and the clean fuel standard, which increases the cost of producing diesel today and discourages the creation of new refineries for tomorrow, and we would close the price gap with the United States within five years by raising Canadian diesel and refined fuel production to one million barrels a day and supplying every region with Canadian refined diesel.

Canadian workers should be turning Canadian oil into Canadian fuel. Under our plan, shovel-ready zones would prepermit areas for refineries, storage and transportation, so firms could build without even applying, as long as they follow all safety and environmental rules. That is cutting red tape and getting things done. They would also get a 100% one-year deduction, which would back new refineries, expansion, storage and pipelines.

The Liberals were elected promising that they would move at speeds Canadians have never seen before. The problem is that Canadians are going broke at speeds Canadians have never seen before. No one has a monopoly on a good idea. We know the Liberals failed on energy production for over a decade, but today, they have an opportunity to do the right thing and support the Conservative emergency fuel relief plan today. I urge every member in the House to do the same.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)]

Madam Speaker, it is great to be in this House and great to hear the member's speech. Although we often disagree on numerous matters, we can agree on one thing, which is that suspending and extending the suspension on the fuel excise tax is an important measure the government put forward.

We heard from an economist yesterday at the finance committee who said that prices on gas and diesel could normalize from the Strait of Hormuz opening again, as early as 14 weeks from now. Although the member opposite has often talked about fiscal prudence in this House, I wonder if he is advocating to extend the relief for Canadians well beyond prices normalizing and coming down.

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

Madam Speaker, any tax relief right now is welcomed by Canadians. The number one expense of every Canadian across this great country is taxes. This is one lever the government can pull right now to give people more relief. Government members should vote for our emergency diesel relief plan.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member for York—South Simcoe and I are not going to agree. I will let him know that right away. The issue for me is that the Liberals are following the Conservative platform and playbook on climate.

While the hon. member dismisses what the Liberals have done as purely ideological, I want to put on the record that as far as the Green Party is concerned, when one takes action to reduce greenhouse gases to stabilize what is happening and avoid tipping points in the atmosphere, it is based on science and evidence. Every party in this House should be willing to agree to sit around a table, listen to the scientists and take the steps that are necessary before we lose human civilization and the options for our grandchildren.

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

Madam Speaker, the last decade was Canada's time to step up to supply the world with LNG and supply the world with clean oil and gas. The government missed the ball.

Nothing is happening. After 18 months, it is still all talk and no action from the government.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have been a member of the House of Commons for some time now, and I have to say that, at times, I get the impression that my Conservative colleagues are lobbying for the oil industry. At the same time, they frequently condemn waste. Like me, they also stand up for people who are struggling. However, they never denounce the humongous subsidies to the oil industry, which rakes in eye-watering profits every year. They would like us to throw even more money at this industry, even though 66% of the oil companies in western Canada are American and we are in a tariff dispute.

The Bloc Québécois proposed something at one point. Every tax expert and finance minister I have spoken to in my life told me that the best thing to do was not to lower the price at the pump. The best thing for the government to do in the event of an increase or inflation was to hold on to that money and redistribute it in a targeted way to the sectors that actually need that oil and diesel to be able to continue production in the supply chain, for example.

Why does my colleague not support this type of measure when we know full well that there has been a drop in the price at the pump recently?

Can he tell me whether this trickled down to taxpayers?

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

Madam Speaker, what I will say is that I am a lobbyist for my constituents. That is what I am. This party, my colleagues here, fought to remove the carbon tax. We were shamed by the Liberals for 10 years, as I said, for being climate deniers. I represent Honda, which has been in my riding for 40 years. The EV mandate maimed that company, but I am an advocate for—

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

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)]

Madam Speaker, it is great to be here to participate in the debate this afternoon. I will be sharing my time with the member for Pickering—Brooklin, my wonderful colleague.

I am honoured to participate in today's debate. The world is changing rapidly. The United States is imposing new tariffs on Canada. At the same time, conflicts in Europe and the Middle East are driving up prices around the world.

Conservatives may want to blame Canada and Canadians for these global trends, as they tend to do in this House regularly, every single day. They seem to blame the government for factors out of our control or blame Canadians and try to use their hardships for political gain. However, the fact is that these higher costs are felt right here at home and all around the world, from Canadians driving to work and running errands to businesses transporting food, building materials and other essential goods across the country.

In response, our government is focused on what we can control: strengthening our economic resilience, building a stronger and more independent country and making life more affordable for Canadians. Economic uncertainty and rising costs have made affordability a top concern for families and businesses across our country. That is why one of our government's priorities is to help Canadians keep more of their hard-earned money.

As we strengthen Canada for the long term, we are also providing immediate support to help Canadians bridge the gap to a brighter future. Our government is taking action by diversifying Canada's trade relationships. We have signed over 20 new trade and security agreements in under a year. We are maintaining responsible fiscal management. We have found $60 billion in savings from government operational improvements, and we are supporting Canadians facing pressure from everyday expenses.

I want to begin by highlighting how Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act, is a key part of that effort. First, allow me to recall the support our government delivered last spring to help Canadians cope with elevated fuel costs. In the spring of this year, we introduced a temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax on gasoline, aviation gasoline, both leaded and unleaded, diesel fuel and aviation fuel in general. This pause reduced federal fuel excise tax rates to zero cents per litre. The measure quickly translated into lower fuel prices for Canadians, with tax savings of 10¢ per litre on gasoline and four cents per litre on diesel. The positive effects of that measure were felt immediately. The morning after the suspension took effect, gasoline prices fell by 11¢ per litre on the very first day, demonstrating that the savings were quickly passed on to consumers.

The suspension had been set to end after September 7 on Labour Day; however, this program was kept flexible by design. Like many of my colleagues, I spent the summer hearing from families and businesses in my riding of Whitby that were thankful for the relief that the spring announcement provided, but curious if it would remain in place amid stubbornly high prices. That is why, before the September 7 deadline, our government chose to announce its intention to extend the suspension of the federal fuel excise tax until January 31, 2027. That was for an additional five months, and then it would be stepped back by 50% through the next two months, to March 31, when it would go back to the full rate.

This measure has already brought down everyday costs for Canadians, including those in the trucking, food, agriculture, housing, construction and delivery sectors. The support provided to Canadians is substantial. The estimated additional fiscal impact of extending the suspension of the federal fuel excise tax is approximately $2.9 billion. As a result, Canadians are expected to receive an estimated $5.3 billion in total tax relief in 2026-27.

By extending the federal fuel excise tax suspension, Canadians will save approximately five dollars on a typical 50-litre tank fill-up at the gas pump. As members can see, this measure would make a noticeable difference for Canadians and has done so. We are grateful that we have the fiscal capacity to extend it further. By lowering costs at the pump and across Canadian supply chains, the government is actually helping Canadians keep more of their hard-earned money while protecting the economy from the pressures that mount beyond our borders. We must not listen to those who tell us that Canada is broken. The fact is that Canada's economy has remained incredibly resilient in the face of global challenges.

In fact, the International Monetary Fund projects that Canada will have the second-fastest economic growth in the G7 this year and next. This strong fiscal performance has reinforced our position. As noted earlier this year in the spring economic update, Canada's projected deficit is now more than $11 billion lower than forecasted in budget 2025, giving us greater capacity to build a stronger and fairer country for all.

Over the past year, we have used part of the increase in revenues to fund measures that make life more affordable and support Canadians. These investments are delivering meaningful results for Canadians in a time of need. At the same time, we are lowering costs today, while investing in a stronger, more resilient and more independent economy for the future. For example, we will work with provinces and territories to double Canada's electricity supply by 2050 to deliver clean, reliable and affordable energy produced at home. Over the last year, we have also signed more than 20 new trade and security deals across five continents.

Our government has already taken significant action to lower costs for Canadians. As of July 1, 2025, we cut income tax for 22 million Canadians by lowering their first personal income tax rate from 15% to 14%. This measure provides up to $420 in annual tax relief per person, or up to $840 for a dual-income family. We also eliminated the goods and services tax on new homes priced up to $1 million for first-time homebuyers, and reduced it on new homes priced between $1 million and $1.5 million.

In Ontario, our government signed an agreement to waive the full 13% GST on new home purchases under $1 million, which will save the average family $130,000 on a $1-million home in Ontario. This is really good news for Canadians who want to enter the housing market. This relief has brought home ownership within reach for more Canadians, especially young families who have struggled or been locked out of the housing market.

Effective April 1, 2025, we eliminated the federal consumer carbon price, delivering direct savings at the pump. That same day, we removed the requirement for provinces and territories to impose the consumer carbon price and delivered additional support for more than 12 million Canadians. We also launched the new Canada groceries and essentials benefit. It provides a family of four up to $1,890 this year and about $1,400 a year for the next four years, and provides a single person up to $950 this year and about $700 each year for the following four years.

Let us just remember that cheques for the third instalment of that groceries and essentials benefit went out yesterday to approximately 12 million Canadians who benefit from this measure, this enhancement to the GST rebate, which is now called the groceries and essentials benefit, with an average of $340 for a family of four. This is significant support right before Thanksgiving to make life just a little easier for families who are struggling with the elevated costs of many goods and essentials.

We also introduced automated federal benefits starting in the 2026 tax year to ensure up to 5.5 million low-income Canadians automatically receive the benefits they qualify for by the 2028 tax year. We also made the national school food program permanent. While Conservative MPs might like to call that program garbage or make absurd claims in the House regularly that there is no food in a food program, on this side of the House, we believe that 400,000 more kids getting fed at school is a good thing, and we would not deprive them and their families of the approximate $800 of savings on groceries. We feel like that is worth fighting for.

In conclusion, I could go on and on, but the fact is that Canada is well positioned to withstand the external pressures arising from an increasingly fragmented and uncertain world. We certainly cannot control global forces. The Strait of Hormuz is not within our control to reopen, but we can control how we respond here at home. This is why we are lowering costs for Canadians. We are supporting families and workers. We are strengthening Canada's economic resilience and independence. We will continue to build the strongest economy in the G7, one that creates prosperity and opportunities for future generations.

I look forward to the questions that I know are coming from the opposition members.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, I think my hon. colleague from Whitby got confused; I think he read a 2024 speech that he read a couple of years ago. I remember in this House when the now finance minister promised that grocery prices would be down by Thanksgiving and that was in 2024. Members will remember he called all the grocery CEOs together and said, “That is it. We are going to have lower grocery prices by Thanksgiving.”

I am wondering if there are any updates to the member's speech on whether grocery prices have lowered since 2024.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am glad to get the member opposite's question, which I always appreciate. Our government has done a lot of things to make life more affordable for Canadians. We have, as I said in my speech, launched the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. The third instalment of those cheques went out just yesterday. That is $1,890 for a family of four to help make life a bit more affordable.

We also just moved forward with announcing the productivity mega deduction, which is a measure that I am sure the Conservatives would support because of its immediate expensing. It is really generous tax deductions for new business investment that will enhance productivity in Canada and will support every one of our industries, including our agriculture and manufacturing industries, all across the country. We also suspended the fuel excise tax and are now extending it. I hope the members opposite will support this.