SoVote

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

Feb/3/22 3:31:40 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I was touched by your statement this week and I want to offer my condolences. I have a question for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government on the other side of the House. I would like to know who ultimately makes health care expenditures. Do the provinces spend the money or is it the federal government? Is it not an indication of some kind of structural problem when the federal government holds on to money from Quebeckers and Canadians and sets conditions on that money, interfering in provincial jurisdictions? Would it not make sense to solve this problem once and for all by transferring the money to the provinces without conditions?

116 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Feb/3/22 3:32:22 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, we all agree that the provinces want just as much as the federal government, and it sometimes thinks it just grows on trees. I know the federal government has to be responsible for what it is putting its money towards. I understand the provinces will decide where it wants that money. If we put money towards federal transfers for health care capacity, and we as the federal government could always track that capacity, then we would be fixing the problem once and for all with not just beds, but staffed beds. We need staff and we need beds. We need to work with the provinces to make that happen.

111 words

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

Feb/3/22 3:33:01 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, picking up on my hon. colleague's comments, he is absolutely right. Among OECD countries, Canada's ICU beds per capita is less than everyone but Mexico. We are 26 out of 27 in terms of number of doctors per thousand. Among developed countries, we rank tenth out of 10 in terms of wait times. Of course, the reason for this is that in 2014 the Harper Conservatives capped the federal health transfer at 3% when health care costs are rising at 5%. The current government said it would change that, but then it adopted the Harper cuts. Will my hon. colleague finally acknowledge that part of the problem today is the Conservative and Liberal cuts to health care that kept federal transfers at 3%, and does he agree with the NDP that it is time to raise it so that we can start properly funding the health care system in this country?

155 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Feb/3/22 3:34:01 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, a kid in kindergarten pushed me, and I do not hold a grudge against him as that happened 20 or 30 years ago. We have to focus on today. I am not sure about the Harper government. I was not here, but I love when Stephen Harper's name is brought up because he was a great prime minister. We have to look at health care and health care means looking at ICU capacity. It means looking at staff. It means looking at nurse practitioners and doctors. I know my hon colleagues on the health committee are going to be studying that. I look forward to those results. Let us get those to the House and let us get those passed so that Canadians can benefit from better health care.

132 words

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed (Vancouver Granville, Lib.)

Feb/3/22 3:34:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak today to Bill C-8, an act to implement certain provisions of the economic and fiscal update tabled in Parliament on December 14, 2021 and other measures. The economic and fiscal update is a transparent report of our nation's finances, but it is about making sure that we have the tools we need to protect Canadians and keep our economy growing. It is about prudence, not austerity, and intelligent investment, not a blank cheque. It would set the stage for us to build on the supports and investments that are bolstering our economy and ensuring its growth for the long term. This means making generational investments in our recovery, such as early learning and child care, so kids in Vancouver Granville and across Canada can get the best start in life. It also means making sure parents, most often women, do not have to make the difficult decision between taking care of their kids or returning to work, adding their immense talent and skill to contribute to Canada's economy. According to RBC, closing the women's participation rate gap would add another 1.2 million people to the labour force at a time we desperately need workers to fill the almost one million jobs across Canada. It means investing in affordable housing and in a green transition. We all know full well that a green transition of our global economy is well under way. It represents a great economic opportunity to create good, sustainable jobs across Canada for generations to come. It means supporting the technology sector, the world from which I came, so that we can be a global leader in innovation and in building the economy of the future today. This is not just about spending, but about creating conditions for future growth, fighting climate change by building a greener economy and ensuring that indigenous communities are included in every conversation about the innovation economy. Fostering diversity and inclusion are not just the right things to do for the fabric of the country, they are also the right thing to do to build a more prosperous future. By ensuring an economy that includes all of us, we access a wider range of experiences, perspectives and skills that would increase global competitiveness, support the long-term success of Canadian communities, rural and urban, and allow us to leverage best in class Canadian expertise on the world stage. As we emerge from these moments of uncertainty, our priority must be on economic stability and long-term growth. The choices we make now will lay the foundation for the future that we will be leaving to our kids. I am proud of the work this government has done to keep us moving forward since 2015, no matter what challenges we have faced as a country. We have also heard a lot about the pandemic's impact on our supply chains. That is why our government announced a call for proposals under the national trade corridors fund, which has allocated up to $50 million to support projects designed to eliminate supply chain congestion. We know good transportation infrastructure and efficient trade corridors are crucial to Canadian businesses' success in the global market. Many predicted it would take years to rebuild our economy from the wounds of the pandemic, but look at us now. We are poised for robust growth in the months to come, growth that will help us pay down the debt and reduce the deficit. We can already see the results of the work that has been done. The December labour force survey from Statistics Canada showed that our labour market gained 55,000 jobs and our unemployment rate dropped to 5.9%, its lowest since the start of the pandemic. Thanks to the resilience of Canadians, we have well surpassed our target of recovering one million jobs. Our plan is working. As we continue to meet the challenges of COVID-19, we are staying the course, focused on climate change, advancing reconciliation with indigenous peoples and building an economy that is stronger, fairer, more prosperous and sustainable for the long term. Let me talk about specifics. I spent a large part of my life in the tech sector building small companies into larger ones and taking intelligent managed risks knowing that I have accountability to my employees and investors. Like many business owners and entrepreneurs, I had to think about long-term growth and building resilience for rainy days, and often we have to borrow to invest in growth. That is what this government has done for Canadians during the pandemic. Now it is time to build on the remarkable return on that investment. This pandemic, as we all know, has not been just a rainy day. This is a once-in-a-generation black swan event, a global crisis. That is why in Bill C-8 the Canada emergency business account is such an integral and important measure. The CEBA is one of the key government supports that local businesses have relied on to weather the darkest days of this pandemic. As we all know, the CEBA provides interest-free, partially forgivable loans of up to $60,000 to small businesses to help cover their operating costs during difficult times. Let me put that into perspective. We all know that small businesses in each of our ridings are the backbone of our economy. My constituency office is in the neighbourhood of South Granville, a vibrant neighbourhood where the streets are lined with small businesses, mom-and-pop shops, restaurants, sidewalk cafes, bookstores and gift shops, all of which build and contribute to thriving communities. They employ our neighbours. They help families pay their rent and mortgages. Without government support, many of these pillars of our community would be out of business today. Because of the Canada emergency business account, nearly 900,000 small businesses have been able to keep their doors open. Eligible businesses have accessed nearly $49 billion in federal support, and because many small businesses continue to face pandemic-related challenges, in January of this year our government extended the repayment deadline for loans, to qualify for partial loan forgiveness, to the end of 2023. This extension will support short-term economic recovery and offer greater repayment flexibility. Bill C-8 would give folks six years to pay off their CEBA loan, ensuring that loan-holders are provided consistent and fair treatment no matter where they live. Bill C-8 would also deliver financial support to our Canadian farmers, who never stopped working to keep food on our tables, through the challenges posed by COVID-19 and beyond. Canadian farmers, like Mickey and her family, with whom I had the pleasure of meeting yesterday, have demonstrated great resilience, stepping up to deliver despite their own challenges. They have done their part in shoring up our food supply by investing in greener, more sustainable farms. With Bill C-8, we would be giving them a well-deserved hand while continuing to help meet our national climate change objectives. The new measures in Bill C-8 would build on the significant support for businesses that became law with the passage of Bill C-2 in December. With Bill C-2, our government made sure that the economic supports needed for businesses would still be available, if and when needed. With the reality that provincial health restrictions remain in effect in certain regions across this country, we know that businesses continue to suffer and face challenges. Applications are now open for the local lockdown program, which provides wage and rent subsidy support of up to 75% for employers who have had to reduce the capacity of their main business by at least 50%. To expand access to the program, we have temporarily lowered the revenue decline threshold for eligibility from 40% to 25% through to mid-February. For businesses facing other pandemic-related losses, support is also now available through the tourism and hospitality program and the hardest-hit business recovery program. By supporting businesses through these challenges, these programs are protecting people's jobs and allowing people to stay connected to their employers. As the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance has said, this keeps people strong, it keeps families strong and it keeps businesses strong. That is what we need to keep our economy strong. As we emerge from the pandemic, our national focus must be jobs and growth. This means attracting top international talent and more immigrants and temporary foreign workers to help Canada meet long- and short-term labour market needs. We have heard a lot about labour shortages recently, but our Canadian economy continues to grow. We have now surpassed our target of creating one million jobs. In fact, in December, as I said, we recovered 108% of the jobs lost at the peak of the pandemic. Immigration is a big part of the engine of our economy. It helps address labour shortages and strengthens our communities. Not only are immigrants essential to Canada's economy, but they also bring fresh perspectives and connect Canada to the world. In short, immigration bolsters our economic future and connects us to the world. The good news is that the fall economic statement allocated $85 million to help unlock access to Canada. This targeted investment will reduce processing times in key areas affected by pandemic-related delays. Ensuring Canada's immigration system is well positioned to meet Canada's economic and labour force goals is essential to our future success. As I said earlier, our long-term strategy of prudence, not austerity, and intelligent investment, not a blank cheque, is the best path forward for success. To bring this to life, we must lean into our clear vision and use public policy levers to make Canada a global leader in technology and innovation. For Canada to lead on the global stage, we must ensure that we create the conditions necessary for that to happen. That is exactly what we are doing. When we implement new approaches, Canadian innovators, businesses and non-profits respond. Building an innovation economy means thinking about where we want to go, not where we are today. It is clear that Bill C-8 is the next essential step in keeping Canadians and our economy strong, while setting the stage for long-term economic prosperity. The record is clear. Our government delivered unprecedented support in order to keep Canadian families and businesses solvent throughout the pandemic, and investment in our economy has continued and will continue to pay off. The plan is working. Our GDP has returned to prepandemic levels, and both Moody's and S&P have reaffirmed Canada's AAA credit rating. We came into this crisis with the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7, and we have increased our relative advantage throughout the pandemic. The measures contained in Bill C-8 are fundamental to supporting Canadians and Canadian businesses, and the provinces and territories, as they continue to battle COVID-19. They need the support to get through the fight and come out stronger, and they are counting on it. They are counting on us. I encourage my hon. colleagues to bear this in mind in their consideration of this essential bill, and join me in supporting its expeditious passage through the House so that Canadians can get the help they need at the time they need it. I am thankful for this opportunity to make this case.

1923 words

All Topics

Mrs. Anna Roberts (King—Vaughan, CPC)

Feb/3/22 3:45:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I have a question that no one has been talking about, and I would like to address a couple of the member's statements on the future of our kids and borrowing. First of all, we have a lack of supply. In my riding, the average price of a condo is $1 million. Apart from the average price of the condo, we also incur costs when purchasing property, so addressing the financial burden on new homeowners is essential. Taxes, such as the carbon tax, the tax on energy and the tax on fuel, create the opportunity for individuals not to be approved by financial institutions. When we take into consideration their gross income and their qualification based on TDS and GDS, it is very important to understand that a person's income can buy less because of the inflation situation. Can my hon. colleague please explain to me how we are going to help people get into the market when we do have inventory, given their income is dropping and they cannot afford it?

176 words

All Topics

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed

Feb/3/22 3:47:12 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, there is no question that around the world inflation is a challenge that countries are dealing with, but Canada has fared better than most countries, including the United States. The reality is that many of the measures we need to put into place for future-proofing our economy are the types of measures that require government investment. They are investments we have made. They also requires us to think about the challenges that Canadians, like those in the member's riding, are facing. This is why the supports and incentives this government has put in place for folks to improve their quality of life, including for child care, for example, will help to increase the wealth of Canadians. These are important initiatives and we are going to continue to invest in them.

134 words

All Topics

Mrs. Julie Vignola (Beauport—Limoilou, BQ)

Feb/3/22 3:48:08 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, my colleague's speech was very interesting. My background is in education, where we use the sandwich method to talk about the successes and challenges we observe. We start with the bread, a positive comment, such as, the Liberals do an excellent job of highlighting their own qualities. Next up is the baloney, and there is a reason it is called baloney: there is something about it that is not quite right and could be a lot better. Last is another slice of bread. In this case, there is not much to the sandwich if we are talking care. If I look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs, right at the bottom is food and housing security, but we have been short 50,000 units a year for 30 years. When will meaningful new investments be made in affordable social and community housing?

145 words

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed

Feb/3/22 3:49:05 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I will try to answer in French. As my colleague knows, our government has made incredible investments, with an additional $6 billion for affordable housing. We will continue to invest, and we will continue to work with the provinces and communities in every region of our country on this very important issue, in order to determine what solutions will work for them in their particular circumstances.

69 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Feb/3/22 3:50:00 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I want to talk specifically about housing. In his statement, the hon. member made mention of the importance of making generational investments. I took a good review of Bill C-8, and there are many deficiencies. One of the biggest deficiencies I noticed, which I would like the hon. member to comment on in particular, is the fact that there is no mention of the anti-flipping tax. We know that flipping properties and injecting wealth into these properties to increase their value is creating more barriers for people to participate and purchase housing, which is a serious problem that is driving the cost of housing up and limiting the market. Will the member comment on why the anti-house-flipping tax is not in this bill?

129 words

All Topics

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed

Feb/3/22 3:50:54 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, as the hon. member knows, there are provisions that have already been put in place to address foreign buyers. We will continue to move forward on all the commitments that were made, including such provisions. I think all of the provisions we can put in place to increase affordability and make it easier for Canadians are not only important, but essential to making sure we can reach a place where every Canadian has a place to call home. That is why our government is going to continue to take those steps and make those investments, as the Minister of Housing has been doing and will continue to do over the coming weeks and months.

116 words

All Topics

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport, Lib.)

Feb/3/22 3:51:35 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I would like to acknowledge my colleague and thank him for his recent support with respect to a round table I hosted on co-op housing. I thank the previous questioner from the Bloc Québécois for raising the topic of public housing, because it is something I am passionate about and I know my colleague on this side shares that. It seems that a lot of the questions coming from the other side, particularly from the Conservatives, indicate they may not have read the bill. They are asking about rapid tests, yet the bill includes rapid tests. They are asking about kids getting back to school, yet this bill includes a lot of support for schools to get back to a healthy way of learning, with better ventilation. They are asking about workers and businesses, yet there are provisions for all of those entities in which it is very important that we invest. They also suggest that the sky is falling with respect to the economy, while experts are indicating our recovery is quite strong and the job market is strong. The most recent labour force survey of Canada indicates our recovery has been strong. Could my hon. colleague comment on some of the relevant aspects of Bill C-8 that would have a positive impact in his riding?

225 words

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed

Feb/3/22 3:52:37 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, as with many of us, our ridings are vibrant communities and in fact microcosms of Canada, so the small businesses that are dependent on government support to get through difficult times are beneficiaries of what is being provided here. I know there are folks who have connections to family farms. In fact, I met with some of them yesterday. Although they may live in my riding, they have connections to family farms outside of it. They will benefit from some of the provisions in this legislation. It is not just about the things that affect us directly in our ridings, but the fact that our constituents have family connections across the country. We may often think about things in the context of what will affect us directly, but the reality is that Canadians think about the things that are affecting other Canadians, as well. That is the beauty of this legislation. It is not just about urban or rural Canadians, but about all Canadians and helping them move forward.

171 words

Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville, CPC)

Feb/3/22 3:53:41 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I really appreciate this conversation. I wonder if the member listened to my colleague for Bay of Quinte, when he spoke about the traditional vaccines that have been made in Canada. The government has not made them available to Canadians as a vaccine or an essential means of investing in our own economy. It is the same with the high-quality rapid tests that were developed in Canada. They were reasonably priced, yet they were not picked up. The government has unlawfully mandated that those who are not vaccinated cannot travel on federally regulated flights and trains, even though Dr. Tam confirmed that vaccinations do not prevent the carrying and transmission of COVID. Would the member agree that everyone, including the vaccinated, should have a rapid test to return the rights of mobility to all Canadians, or should we return to the PPE protections that were already in place and effective at our airports so Canadians can be engaged all across the country in improving our economy and getting back to normal?

174 words

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed

Feb/3/22 3:54:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, vaccines are the best way for us to move forward through this pandemic, and making sure that every single Canadian is vaccinated is the best way to move forward. We know that folks who are vaccinated do not suffer the same consequences when they get COVID as those who are not. This is an important thing for us to consider as we move forward. We know that the folks who are vaccinated tend to be 67 % less likely to end up in an ICU, so when we think about air travel and being able to connect with Canadians and to connect with our families, we are going to have to trust the science. The science is clear that vaccines work. The science is clear that masking works. The science is clear that rapid tests are not always accurate. We need to think about what the best solution is, not just for ourselves. We have a social contract in this country to take care of one another. We have a social contract to look after every single one of us, even if that means making sacrifices for ourselves.

189 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

Feb/3/22 3:56:02 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to engage in this debate, but let me first address another issue. I am so very disgusted by the images and displays of Nazi symbols and the use of the Confederate flag and other such hate symbols by those participating in the convoy. This is absolutely despicable, especially in light of the fact that racial and systemic inequity has been exacerbated with the impacts of COVID on the Black community, the indigenous community and racialized and marginalized people. The problems of racism and structural inequity existed even before the pandemic, but COVID-19 has exposed for many the serious inequities in our country. I do not think it has escaped many, especially those in indigenous communities, Black communities and racialized communities, that the police's treatment of the convoy is starkly different from the treatment of indigenous protesters who are fighting for their land rights and protecting mother earth. My colleague, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby, has put forward in this Parliament legislative solutions to amend the Criminal Code to broaden the provisions relating to hate propaganda to make it an offence to publicly display visual representations that promote or incite hatred or violence against an identifiable group. He is asking the government to take specific steps to immediately counteract all forms of hate and discrimination, hate crimes and incidents of hate. I hope the government will adopt this private member's bill as a government bill. On the issue of inequities, we are now deeply in the fifth wave of the pandemic. The wealthiest continue to make record profits, and the government still refuses to bring in a pandemic profiteering tax. Canada's banks earned a combined profit of almost $58 billion in 2021. Meanwhile, the lowest-income seniors are getting their guaranteed income supplement cut. The New Democrats flagged concerns even before the election last summer and the government did nothing. In Vancouver East, seniors are getting evicted and are being rendered homeless right now. The government says it cares deeply about seniors, but it thinks that doing nothing until at least May of this year is somehow good enough. It is as if the government and the Liberals are blind to the fact that seniors are getting kicked out of their homes this moment, not in May. This is happening in the middle of the fifth wave of the pandemic during the winter months. Action needs to be taken now. Seniors cannot wait until May to get the support they need. The government brought in the Canada worker lockdown benefit, but let me tell members about the nightmare that my constituents are having in trying to access that support. Wait times over the phone are at least two to four hours, from what my constituents report. A lot of people cannot get through and they have tried multiple times a day. There is no information on navigating the phone menu—

492 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Feb/3/22 4:00:45 p.m.
Watch

There is an issue with the hon. member's microphone. There is no interpretation. We will try again with the hon. member for Vancouver East.

25 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan

Feb/3/22 4:02:18 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8

Madam Speaker, the phone lines are not clear in what prompts to follow and the number to press for the CWLB. Callers are put on hold for hours, and then when they finally get through, they are navigated to the wrong menu and have to start all over again. The phone system is not set up in the same way that it was for the CERB or the CRB where one—

72 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Feb/3/22 4:03:09 p.m.
Watch

We are actually going to move to the next speaker and come back to the hon. member for Vancouver East once IT has had a chance to reach out to her. The hon. member will have seven minutes remaining once we can return to her. Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed. The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South.

67 words

Mr. Philip Lawrence (Northumberland—Peterborough South, CPC)

Feb/3/22 4:03:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-8 Bill C-206

Mr. Speaker, I hope the member is able to get her technical problems resolved. I was looking forward to enjoying her speech. I know how challenging it can be with technical things. I want to start with the substance of my speech. Like everyone else today, I am addressing Bill C-8, which is a financial update to the fiscal update. I am going to talk about some specific issues. Over the next few days, we will have a well-rounded discussion, but today I really wanted to talk about one area specifically, and that is part 1(d). It has to do with the introduction of a refundable tax credit to return fuel charge proceeds to farming businesses in backstop jurisdictions. Before we get into that, I want to talk a little about farmers and how important they are to our economy. They provide the very sustenance we need every day, including throughout the pandemic. They actually account for nearly 7% of our GDP. In addition to feeding Canada and Canadians, people around the world are counting on our Canadian farmers. We are the fifth-largest agriculture exporter in the world and that provides nearly one in eight Canadians a job. We are one of the world's largest producers in flaxseed, canola, pulses, oats and durum. Our farmers, despite providing an incredible bounty for us and around the world, have undergone some significant challenges throughout the pandemic. Like everyone else, they fought through the challenges of the pandemic. They also had challenges going into the pandemic, like the harvest from hell in 2019, which had the significant challenge of crops literally rotting in the field because it was so wet and farmers were unable to dry their fields. That harvest exacerbated the challenges our farmers were already facing, such as the self-inflicted wounds from the government in the form of the carbon tax. The fact is that in some cases there is no doubt that the claims of revenue neutral do apply. If a person lives in a condo in downtown Toronto, there is a very good chance that their rebate is equal to the amount of the carbon tax they pay. However, if someone is a grain farmer in Saskatchewan, there is a very good chance and, in fact, a 100% chance, that they are paying thousands and thousands of dollars in carbon tax while receiving a mere pittance in return from the carbon tax rebate. That is what led me, after discussions with some of the great advocacy groups for our farmers, to bring in a private member's bill, Bill C-206. Bill C-206 was legislation that would have exempted propane and natural gas from the carbon tax for farmers. It was well received and it created some great discussion. Our stakeholders were very pleased with it. Initially, if one can believe this, the agriculture minister said that the carbon tax was not significant. Despite me and others receiving carbon tax bills from farmers around this great country in the amount of tens of thousands of dollars, she said it was not that significant. However, as the bill gained momentum, all of a sudden the tone changed, which was quite odd. She said that there now might very well be an issue. The minister went from “it is not significant” to “it might be an issue at some point”. Then, of course, as we know, later on in the fiscal update, she announced that there would be a rebate program. That rebate would be a $1.47 for every $1,000 of eligible farming expenses, or $1.73 in 2023. We will see the math, but we will see that is not nearly as much carbon tax as farmers are actually paying. Before we get into that, let us talk about a rebate versus an exemption and why we still need an exemption. A rebate takes money from the farmer, puts it in Ottawa and then takes it back to the farmer. Why would we go through that machination of having it go to Ottawa and then come back to the farmer? Why would we not just leave it in the pockets of farmers? I can only speculate but I have a couple of ideas. It might be that, in fact, the government wanted to take credit for an idea that came from farmers, and it wanted to have that credit. It just might be that the government wants control of that money. It is funny what happens sometimes when people's money goes to Ottawa. It tends to diminish. In talking to advocacy groups, whether in the agriculture committee or one-on-one conversations with farmers, we hear that they welcome the rebate but they would much prefer an exemption. Let us move on from there to see how this is calculated. It is calculated based on eligible farming expenses. For those of you who are not aware, who have never filled out a tax return for a farmer or done it for their own farm, a farmer has to state and list all of their expenses on their tax return. This bill says that, if they had $25,000 or more, based on the amount of those expenses, the more carbon tax rebate they will get. Therefore, they are using eligible expenses as a proxy for the amount. In other words, the more they burn the more they earn. Where have we heard that before? That is exactly how the system works. Only it does not work. In the proxy that they use, they are saying that with more eligible farming expenses there is more carbon tax rebate. The challenge with that is that not all farmers are the same and not all areas of the country are the same. The temperature is very different in the Okanagan Valley in British Columbia than it is in northern Alberta. Of course, the amount of fossil fuels, including natural gas and propane, is different. In addition to that, different industries have different routes to alternatives to fossil fuels. For certain industries, it may take years but it is relatively inexpensive to switch to alternative sources. In contrast, with other industries, it may take decades and hundreds of thousands of dollars, yet we are blanketing it. We are using the same formula for different types of farms. I am pleased, once again, that the government is starting to recognize that the agriculture industry, in addition to being great stewards of our land, already carbon neutral and ahead of many other industries, is what is called “an emissions-intensive trade exposed industry”. That means that there are certain industries, of which agriculture is certainly one, that do not have the ability to switch to alternatives, and there are certain emissions that may take years, if not decades, to get out of the system, despite the best efforts of our farmers. The reason, as we heard over and over in the agriculture committee, is twofold. As I already said, there simply are not alternatives, so all this is an increased cost. There is no way to motivate farmers to do something that is impossible. The other part of it is that farmers are price-takers. The price that farmers get for their commodities off the gate is set by markets thousands of miles away from them. Therefore, they are unable to push that cost onto the consumer. That means many of our farmers are struggling to hang on and are struggling to get through Justinflation like everyone else, so it is a significant challenge. I will just wrap up here by going through an example of how ineffective and insignificant this rebate is. For example, if a grain farm in Manitoba had a gross income of $2 million, which could very easily be a net income of zero, a farmer could expect a rebate of $3,446. That same farm would be paying a carbon tax of almost $10,000. It is woefully insufficient. Farmers need an exemption, not a rebate. They need more money in their pockets, not in Ottawa bureaucrats'.

1362 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 23