44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 13, 2024 10:00AM
- 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 2:22:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the economic vandalism and carbon tax cover-up of the government has now been exposed because of relentless Conservative pressure. The government finally leaked out, to the CBC, the economic hit Canada will take, originally reported at $20 billion. With inflation, it is $30 billion a year, or almost $2,000 for every single family in Canada. The government tried to silence the Parliamentary Budget Officer on this.
How can we believe anything the Minister of Environment has to say on taxes?
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 2:25:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I noted in the discussion yesterday that the Leader of the Opposition had a newfound respect for economists. However, I will tell him that 300 economists, in addition to the PBO, say eight out of 10 Canadians get more money back. The way it works is directly inverse to income. The Leader of the Opposition ignores the costs of climate change. Here are the facts: His climate plan is to let the planet burn. It is to ignore the economic opportunities associated with the energy transition. Look, this is a fellow who ran in the last campaign on putting in place a carbon price. Who is telling the truth?
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 3:45:51 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, if the Liberals are so confident in their climate policy, why will they not be transparent and share their economic analysis with Canadians?
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 4:49:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge says that he is concerned about the economic effect of climate change. Well, I can say that so are the one million people who live in the Fraser Valley, who just received news last week that they will be getting zero dollars out of the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund. We are getting just empty words from the Liberal Party about worrying about the economy and climate change. Why is there no money coming to British Columbia to defend, protect and support the port of Vancouver, the biggest port in all of Canada, which was cut off for nine days due to severe flooding in 2021? Where is the money?
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 6:03:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am going to try to show restraint.
This is astounding. I hope my colleague has put his earpiece in to understand what I am about to say. The Bank of Canada has analyzed the impact of the carbon tax, and it is 0.02%. The carbon tax has a very minimal impact on Quebec. It is very minor.
I would like to inform my colleague that Quebec has its own system, known as the carbon exchange, which also has a certain economic impact. However, this system reduces gas emissions and saves money in the long term on climate disasters.
What I find disappointing is hearing other people say they are disappointed in the Bloc Québécois when, as I explained earlier, we were very reasonable when we agreed to an exemption for grain drying, even though it does not apply in Quebec. Those folks refuse to support it. My colleague certainly did not mention that. I find that disappointing.
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/24 7:18:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to start this conversation with a quote from Margaret Thatcher. Of course, the honourable and fabulous Margaret Thatcher said that the problem with socialism is that one eventually “run[s] out of other people's money.”
We have hit that point. I think it is official. The government has hit rock bottom. However, it will find a way, just as it has done with ethics scandals, to find a level even below rock bottom.
Let us take a look at the facts right now. When we look at the way to balance a budget or to bring a fiscal house in order, a government has three levers. One is economic growth. The more an economy grows, the more production there is, and the more there is to tax. That brings us to the next one, which is revenue. The more revenue there is, the more money is coming in. The higher the taxes are, the more revenue is coming in. The third part is expenditures. We have seen, of course, that this is the money going out the door. We have growth. We have the money coming in the door and going out the door. Let us take a systematic approach. We will start with government expenditures.
The reality is that no government has ever spent anywhere near the amount of money the government will be spending this year and what it has forecast in its main estimates. The main estimates present a spending of a total of $449.2 billion; $191.6 billion is to be voted on, and $257.6 billion is statutory.
We can take that and look at where we were at the end of 2015, when we were spending about $250 billion. This is nearly a doubling of government expenditures in less than 10 years. That is truly a shocking number. The reality is that this could actually be affordable, potentially, if we had the economic growth to back it up. However, as we will see in a moment, we do not. The reality is that more Canadians are paying more money. Nine out of 10 in the middle class are paying more. We have seen, right from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, that the carbon tax is costing the majority of Canadians money. We saw, actually, just from their own secret report, because of the pushing and prodding of one of my colleagues at finance committee, they admitted that $30 billion in additional funds is coming out of Canadians' pockets just in the form of indirect costs of the carbon tax alone.
We have seen that the spending just keeps going. The question we will often hear from the other side of the aisle is this: What would Conservatives change?
Here are a couple of things that I will just rattle off: $250 million to the Asian infrastructure bank, $76 million of funding awarded in the green slush fund to brazen conflicts of interest, $12 million in ineligible contracts, $50 million to Mastercard and $12 million to Loblaws for fridges. It just goes on, with $200 million to McKinsey and millions of dollars being wasted by the government. It is truly just a firehose of spending going anywhere and everywhere. We have seen the expenditures increase and increase.
Before we talk about the increase in taxes, let us talk a bit about economic growth. The reality is that, if an economy is thriving and doing well, it will benefit everyone, depending on how the wealth gets split up. There are arguments to be had, and those are arguments that are valuable and should be had. If, however, there is no revenue coming in, there is no revenue to redistribute. Often, in worse economic times, the ones who suffer the most are the most vulnerable.
Let us look at the government's economic record. Since 2015, we are looking at a nearly flat or a zero growth in GDP per capita. GDP per capita can really be used interchangeably with incomes, because it is a measure of how much every Canadian's economic livelihood is increasing on average. We have had almost no growth when it comes to Canadians.
We have also seen record numbers of children now falling into poverty and people going to the food banks, including record numbers of children. We have an economy that is stalled. We have a lost decade here in Canada.
It is not just me saying what I am going to say. Members can look to John Manley, former Liberal finance minister; Bill Morneau, former Liberal finance minister; and David Dodge, current Liberal and former governor of the Bank of Canada. These individuals are all saying the same thing: Canada needs to focus more on growth. We need to have our economy grow because, of course, this will help our citizens, and it will also help secure our government. More economic growth means the government can collect more and do more to protect health care and other important social safety nets. Just to sum up, we have actually had record revenue because the current government is obsessed with increasing taxes and increasing the burden on middle-class Canadians. Nine out of 10 people pay more.
Of course, the Liberals' most recent cash grab is the capital gains tax. They create the fabrication that it will only affect the ultrarich. Nothing could be further from the truth. LiUNA, a union, recently came out opposing it because its members realize it. Physicians, electricians and mechanics realize it. Canadians who are taking the steps to secure their retirement through a secondary rental property realize it. Parents who are buying a secondary house to invest in their children, because the children cannot afford a house anymore, realize it. This is a cash grab. It is true that there is a limited portion of the population that will realize it in a given year; however, the reality is that although only 1% of Canadians will die in a year, 100% of us will eventually die. Much the same logic applies to capital gains.
We have seen the government increase the tax burden on the middle class to pay for the McKinseys and, perhaps worst of all, to pay $54 billion in interest, which goes to wealthy bankers and bondholders. The government is literally robbing the middle class, endangering our most vulnerable in order to help its Liberal-insider buddies. That is the Liberals' story on taxation. We have seen what happened to spending, and the Liberals' growth is equally as bad.
What is the result of this? People at the Fraser Institute said that we are in the worst decline in the standard of living in the last 40 years. I am thankful for the Fraser Institute's work, but simply talking to our neighbours and to our constituents will reveal the same thing. It was almost taken as a given, when I was growing up, that we would do better than our parents and that my kids would do better than I did. This was just a reality that was going to happen. Unfortunately, we have seen that reality disappear in front of our very eyes. At this point, to be able to afford a house is beyond the aspirations of many Canadians and many young folks, who are just struggling to barely get by.
We are in a place where there are encampments from coast to coast to coast. There are dumpster-diving communities, who need to get food out of garbage cans. Workers are living out of their cars. Students are living underneath bridges. This is not right, and we can quote all the empirical numbers we want, but all we really need to do is go out there and talk to our constituents, and we will hear just the same. I am sure, whether Conservative, Liberal or NDP, we are all hearing the same thing.
As I noted when I started my speech, Margaret Thatcher once very wisely said that the problem with socialism is that one eventually “run[s] out of other people's money.” With a debt of over $1.3 trillion, with interest payments of over $54 billion and with a government incapable of doing the most basic of services, such as delivering passports, we have hit rock bottom. I do not want to see what is next in the current Liberal government.
1405 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
