44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 13, 2024 10:00AM
- Jun/13/24 10:29:33 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, the common-sense Conservative.
We just learned, moments ago, that the government has been keeping a $20-billion secret. Common-sense Conservatives have been demanding that the government release the real cost of the carbon tax, after the Parliamentary Budget Officer revealed that there was a report the government had been covering up and that he was gagged from releasing the report about the actual cost to Canadians. Now, because common-sense Conservatives brought forward this motion before the House, and because of our relentless questioning and the pressure that is weighing heavily on Liberal MPs, the government has finally relented and has released part of the information. It had to be pulled out like a rotten tooth, and rotten it is.
It is $20 billion per year in lost GDP, as a result of the carbon tax. That works out to $1,200 per family in extra annual costs for Canadians. Twenty billion dollars for 17 million families is $1,200 a family in higher costs that the Prime Minister has been covering up. Not once, in any tables that he released, which claimed that Canadians were somehow better off with the carbon tax and rebate, did the Prime Minister include these economic costs that he knew existed, because he wanted to continue to spread the falsehood. He wanted to tell Canadians that paying more for gas, heat and groceries would make them better off, just like he claimed that raising their income tax would make the middle class better off. Ninety per cent of middle-class income taxpayers are paying more now than they were paying nine years ago when he promised to cut their taxes.
Yesterday, we tested the Liberals' claim that only the $800,000-a-year investment banker, who is in the top 0.13%, would pay this new job-killing tax on home builders, farmers, small business owners and health care workers. We tested it by simply saying that if that were the case, the Liberals would amend their bill to say that anybody who is part of the 99.87% of the population would be excluded from any new capital gains taxes. The minister refused to do that because we all know that it would be plumbers, electricians, carpenters, farmers, small business owners and restaurant owners who would pay this Liberal tax increase.
What we are coming to understand is that we cannot believe a word the Prime Minister says about money or about taxes because at the end of the day, he has an insatiable appetite for other people's money. He wants to stuff the face of his morbidly obese government with the hard-earned tax dollars of working-class Canadians, and he has the full support of the greedy NDP to do it. The New Democrats believe that the people's money is their money, and they are here for one purpose: to help the Prime Minister vacuum up every single nickel that hard-working Canadians, including entrepreneurs, earn on the ground.
Common-sense Conservatives are exactly the opposite. People will notice that we take delight in the fact that, in this place, we do not fit in. We stand out as the only party that would axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime.
The Bloc Québécois voted in favour of a tax hike for Quebec entrepreneurs, farmers, doctors and home builders. According to the Bloc Québécois, Quebeckers should give more of their money to the massive Liberal federal government.
The Liberal Bloc is part of a centralist coalition. We are the only party that wants to allow Quebec entrepreneurs, farmers, doctors and small businesses to keep their money and be masters in their own house.
That is also the case with the Quebec City tramway. This project would cost at least $11 billion, or $28,000 per greater Quebec City family. If those families were asked if they wanted $28,000 or a tramway 10 years from now, I think it would be an easy decision for them. Quebec City residents prefer to have the money in their pocket. They want a third link to connect the two sides of the river.
That is what common sense is all about, and we are the only party that thinks this way. We do not want a white elephant. We want to fix the budget and axe the taxes. That is common sense.
Here we are today with the government again raising taxes and, again, making claims that are demonstrably false when we look at the government's own documents.
When I look at the capital gains issue, first, the government claimed that only 44,000 people would pay. That is a small number. They all live on a hill somewhere. Then, the government admitted that 300,000 separate businesses, most of them small businesses, would pay. Therefore, there are 300,000 businesses, but only 44,000 would pay. I find it hard to believe that each of these 44,000 people own six different businesses. In reality, those 300,000 businesses probably have millions of owners and definitely have millions of employees. All of them would pay the tax.
Then, the government members said that they were very concerned that welders are paying a higher tax rate than investors. We have a National Occupation Classification for a welder. We could say, in the law, that anyone who is a welder, as defined by the National Occupation Classification, is excluded, but the minister would not do that. I said to exclude the NOC for carpenters. She did not want to do that either. Why do we not exclude nurses? Nurses who invest in rental properties or who maybe have a family cottage they may want to sell could be excluded. We could look up the NOC code for nurses, and pop it right into the Income Tax Act. It could say that no nurse would pay that higher tax rate. The government was not willing to do that either.
In fact, we know that, because they want to tax nurses, carpenters, welders and electricians. They want to tax everybody. In fact, I went even further and asked why we do not just exclude everybody who makes less than $120,000 a year. The government did not want to do that either. It turns out that, if none of these people were affected by the tax, the minister should have said that it was easy and that she could have it drafted up this afternoon and could have it put in the bill with no problem, but of course she did not. She knows exactly what she is doing. She is putting her greedy hands in the pockets of working-class people and she is stealing their money, just like she did with the carbon tax, just like the government did when it raised income tax and just like it did in 2017 when it went after our small business tax creators.
The good news is that we have defenders of the taxpayers in this party. The tax fighters are all on this side of the house: the common-sense Conservatives. If someone out there is working hard, has seen their housing costs double, is worried about losing their home and has two or even three jobs just to avoid eviction, they might feel a loss of hope. The good news is that life was not like this before the current Prime Minister and the NDP, and it will not be like this after they are gone.
We are going to bring home the Canada that we knew and that we still love, by axing the tax system, building the homes, fixing the budget and stopping the crime. We would once again make this a country where hard work would pay off; where entrepreneurs would be incentivized, rewarded and honoured, not demonized; where we would not turn workers against business owners, but would turn workers into business owners; and where hard work would bring powerful paycheques and pensions that would buy affordable food, gas and homes in safe neighbourhoods.
That is what the common people deserve. The common sense of the common people is united for our common home. It is their home, my home and our home. Let us bring it home.
1416 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 10:57:46 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the motion we have been presented with today calls for an economic analysis of the carbon tax. I would submit, however, that what is needed is a far more macroeconomic analysis of the climate change question. This should include, for example, the costs of climate inaction, particularly the increase in insurance premiums and the health costs associated with pollution-related risks. This is nowhere to be found in the Conservatives' motion, however.
I would like to know whether this is because, according to the Conservatives, there is no cost associated with climate inaction.
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 1:00:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I cannot help but think about how incredibly short-sighted it is for us to be talking about the economic impacts on Canadians today without looking at the costs of us doing nothing, as was brought up by my colleague. We know that the climate crisis has incredible economic costs. We know that the economic cost is likely to reduce national GDP by $25 billion by 2025. That is equivalent to $630 per person in lost income, with people earning low incomes being affected the most. We know this. Also, fighting increasingly destructive wildfires costs $1 billion a year, and these costs will only continue to rise.
Does the member agree that the costs of the climate crisis need to be prioritized and that we cannot ignore that the climate crisis is happening as we speak?
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 2:24:33 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that eight out of 10 fact does not include the $30 billion of economic costs; that is $2,000 of additional costs for every single family. When we exposed that, he denied it. When the Parliamentary Budget Officer reported on it, they attacked him and tried to gag him. The minister is not worth the economic vandalism. We cannot believe a word he says about taxes. He needs to resign.
When will the Prime Minister fire him?
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 5:50:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and for his many very relevant answers to questions.
I would like to ask him the following question.
The claim is that this will cost the Canadian economy $25 million, but that does not take into account the annual benefits of investments made in the fight against climate change. That figure is $25 billion a year now. It also does not take into account the costs associated with climate change that will be avoided between now and 2030. That figure is $23 billion a year.
Would that not add up to two, almost three times as much as the Conservatives claim?
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 6:20:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague talks about the costs to the Canadian economy, but surely he knows that research has shown that there could be up to a $38-trillion cost to the global economy from climate change. The cost of climate change is wildly larger, and the impact on farmers, families and individuals in our country is going to be very severe.
What is the Conservative plan on dealing with the extraordinary cost of climate change? What will it cost our economy, our farmers and our families?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 11:48:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, on May 31, I asked the following question:
...with respect to the dairy barn at the Joyceville correctional institution that is scheduled to open in July, number one, what was the original budgeted cost? Number two, what is the actual cost? Number three, has dairy quota been made available by Dairy Farmers of Ontario? If so, what are the contract details and how much will that cost? Finally, will any of the milk that is produced be entered into the general supply for public consumption?
I will give some details. When the restoration of the Joyceville prison farm program was announced in 2018, Mr. Goodale, who was then the minister in charge of corrections, stated that the authorization came with three conditions, of which the first two were, “staying within the budget of $4.3 million over five years, [and] being implemented in a timely fashion.” The first of these conditions was breached almost instantly. In May 2018, the cost was revised upwards by more than 100%, to $9.75 million. In October 2018, this was changed to $15.2 million, three times what it had been less than a year earlier, but that was just the beginning.
In July 2019, this estimate was again adjusted to $18 million, and internal documents from the time contained a notation stating that this estimate required further review as each project's scope of work had yet to be confirmed. In January 2020, the estimate was again increased, this time to $20 million, and in May 2020, it was increased to $21.08 million. By September 2020, internal documents showed that costs would hit $25.9 million, which, if anyone is keeping track, is five times the original estimate. Finally, in March 2021, the goat dairy that was driving many of these cost increases was put on hold, although, I will note, it was never formally cancelled, and it is still an open question, as to whether Correctional Service Canada intends to open a goat dairy as well.
Regarding the issue of dairy quota for cow's milk, I am aware that a few months ago, Correctional Service Canada said that there were only 12 dairy cows in the herd housed at Collins Bay, and at that time, CSC still did not have an agreement for the purchase of milk quota. The facility is designed to house 30 cows and, supposedly, is to be used for research quota. CSC has stated that this research would be shared between two universities and that the quota is currently being negotiated, but McGill University and the University of Guelph are unwilling to comment on this arrangement.
Therefore, can the minister confirm where the quota is coming from, how much it will cost and what it will be used for. Finally, can the minister guarantee that milk produced using inmate, labour-paid prison wages, which are far below the minimum wage, will never enter the regular milk supply stream for human consumption?
499 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
