I can see the minister is very angry, and there are a lot of reasons to be angry when you think about the Liberals, especially the federal Liberals. You know something I’m angry about, Speaker, and people of my community are equally angry about it, and it’s the federal carbon tax. It’s leading us to soaring fuel prices, making it unaffordable for everyone—tough to even drive a car. People have to think twice about driving a car in my riding now and ridings across northern Ontario.

It’s unfair to every driver in this province, especially those in the north who rely very heavily on their vehicles, just so that they can go to work every day, run errands, take their kids to soccer practice. All of these things are just too expensive because of the federal Liberals and their provincial counterparts who refuse to change this awful position on the carbon tax and are constantly hurting northern communities. We continue to take leadership on addressing affordability in this province to help the north get the help it deserves.

Can the Minister of Transportation please tell us how the carbon tax is hurting northern Ontario communities with this regressive, terrible—

It’s unacceptable. It’s breaking the backs of common, hard-working Ontarians, northern Ontarians. And the Liberals across the aisle, they just want to sit silent. I guess it’s because their leader is one of the only Liberals left in the entire country of Canada who will not speak out against this terrible carbon tax and the additional nearly triple—triple, again—they want to increase it.

Can the minister please explain to us how this negative tax is hurting the people of our province?

My question is for the Minister of Northern Development and Indigenous Affairs.

It’s no secret: The carbon tax is making everything more expensive for everyone, especially for the people who live in the communities throughout northern Ontario. These communities are already feeling the pressure at the gas pumps, where fuel costs are significantly higher, in comparison, than they are anywhere else in the entire province.

But the opposition NDP members and the independent Liberals continue to support the carbon tax. They continue to support carbon tax hikes. They actually agree with the federal Liberals’ plan to increase the carbon tax on gasoline seven more times before 2030.

The people of the north deserve better.

Can the minister please explain how the carbon tax negatively impacts individuals and families in northern Ontario, as well as Indigenous communities?

Speaker, it is absolutely shocking that the federal government continues to force this terrible tax on northern communities that are already paying more for fuel. It’s even more shocking that the members opposite who represent these northern communities continue to support the carbon tax.

Northern Ontario faces unique barriers when it comes to fuel costs, and these have to be considered before we impose these further taxes on them.

Clearly, the federal Liberals don’t care about the adverse effects of carbon tax on northern communities. They clearly don’t care about the northern communities at all.

I’m wondering if the minister could please elaborate a little bit more for us on how the carbon tax is negatively impacting not only the residents in all of the communities, but the businesses as well, throughout the region, in northern Ontario.

My question is for the Minister of Indigenous Affairs and Northern Development. The carbon tax is essentially a tax on everything, Speaker. It’s on your groceries, your gasoline, your home heating and every other day-to-day essential.

For over a year now, the Chiefs of Ontario have been calling on the federal government to consult with them on the impact that this harmful tax is having on all of their communities. Due to the federal government’s failure to address the First Nations’ concerns, the Chiefs of Ontario filed for judicial review into the application of the carbon tax in Indigenous communities. They have called this tax anti-reconciliatory and discriminatory.

Can the minister please tell the House how this carbon tax is disproportionately impacting northern Ontario communities?

Instead of helping northern Ontario foster economic growth and to reach our full potential, the federal government is bringing one tax hike after another after another after another. It is clear that neither the Liberals nor the NDP understand, respect or care about the financial hardship that many individuals and families are going through.

Northern and Indigenous communities should not be paying the price of this harmful and regressive tax. Speaker, can the minister please explain further why the carbon tax has such detrimental effects on northern Ontario and especially First Nation communities?

Thank you so much to the minister for that exceptional response.

As the cost of living continues to rise, people are justifiably concerned about the carbon tax and how it’s going to make everything in our life more expensive. Workers from all sectors of the economy are already feeling the hardship and challenges because of the carbon tax, and sadly, the federal government does not care. They just don’t care, Mr. Speaker. They’re not doing anything to change it.

Ontario’s hard-working individuals, businesses and farmers deserve to be treated fairly, and they deserve to be treated with dignity. Our government must continue to stand up for the people of this province and ask Justin Trudeau and the federal government to please end the carbon tax.

Speaker, can the minister please explain how further increases of this terrible tax, the carbon tax—this awful tax—are going to hurt Ontarians?

Shocker, Mr. Speaker—Sault Ste. Marie is getting all the love today. I’m loving it.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I have a very, very important question on behalf of the people of Sault Ste. Marie for our wonderful Minister of Energy. Many individuals and families, particularly those in northern Ontario, rely on fuel to heat their homes. Unfortunately, residents in rural and remote parts of northern Ontario face additional barriers in heating their homes due to the lack of viable alternatives.

Families and businesses in Sault Ste. Marie are telling me that they already feel the carbon tax’s impact on their energy bills every single month, and quite frankly, this has been a pretty warm winter in Sault Ste. Marie and throughout the province. It’s unfair and unjust for them to bear the burden of this regressive carbon tax, yet the Liberals and the NDP are content to see the costs related to the carbon tax raised even higher.

Minister, please let us know how our communities in the north are suffering more because of this unaffordable carbon tax.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I appreciate that.

Interjection.

Interjection.

I really, if I can, and if the member from Niagara will allow me, would love to be able to speak to the member for Orléans’s amendment to our motion at this time, which of course as we all know is about affordability. I think that it’s a challenging situation, though, Madam Speaker. It’s a very challenging situation when we sit in this House and we look at ways that we can fix things, and yet when I look at this carbon tax, I can’t fathom how it fixes the problem. Here at home, I’m challenged to see how it fixes the problem, but what I can clearly see—and I think we can all see—is how it’s costing every single one of us, the end user, more for everything.

The HST does cost everything more. We’ve been paying for the HST now for a long time. We’re all used to that. I mean, hey, I’d be happy to pay no tax. Mea culpa, I would love no tax. I don’t think anyone on this side of the House would ever argue with that. But, maybe there is some argument of, like, “the end justified the means.” We needed income to pay for things like health care. We needed money to pay for various items. And a lot of this revenue for the government allows us to be able to afford the things that we enjoy, as people in a free and democratic society, here in this province and certainly in this country, enjoy—and, arguably, maybe some should be able to enjoy more than others. I think that there are certainly challenges in that regard.

All that being said, this particular carbon tax—it’s a tax. It’s not fixing the problem it was intended to solve. So if it’s not going to fix the problem that it was intended to, then maybe the feds should look at a different way of doing it. How else can we protect the environment? Let’s not even talk about how the lack of this—

Both of these measures—whether the carbon tax or whether the HST—are all coming from the feds. So we’re looking at the feds and saying, “Hey, guys, you’ve got option A and you’ve got option B. Option A, the carbon tax, is supposed to fix the environment, but it’s just costing us all more money. Option B is a way to fill our coffers, and it’s costing people more money. You should change something here.” Well, let’s be reasonable. The whole concept of this amendment is, which one should we ask for; which one do we want to bug the feds about? Do we want to say to the feds, “Hey, guys, stop charging people more money for something that isn’t fixing the problem you’re trying to fix”—the environmental concerns—or, “Stop charging people more money for this other problem, which is just trying to pay for all of our other goods and services that we have out there”?

Madam Speaker, I’ll repeat what I said earlier. Personally, I’d rather have no tax of any kind. Don’t tax me at all. Keep your hand out of my pocket. I think most people would agree. Nobody wants government’s hands in their pockets.

But I do like the services that I have. I do enjoy having roads to drive on. Sometimes I wish they were nicer. Sometimes I really wish there were more of them. I like being able to go see my doctor. Sometimes I do wish there were more of them. Sometimes I wish there was better access to different things. But I do like what I have. I like being able to send my kids to school. Actually, I’ve got no concerns with my kids’ schooling. They’re doing really good in school. They’ve got nice teachers, a good team there, a good board, a nice facility. I’m quite happy with that side of things, to be honest with you. But I recognize that that costs money. So we’ve got to pay for that—and we are.

The carbon tax—what is it fixing? It’s not fixing the environment. Is it going to change how much pollution someone generates in any jurisdiction outside of this province or country? Is it going to change any of that? No. We know for a fact that it won’t change that at all. But members in various—and rightfully so—would say, “We’ve got to worry about our own house first. We can’t worry about everybody else. We’ve got to worry about us.” That’s a fair argument, right? It’s a very fair argument. It makes a ton of sense. You’ve got to worry about yourself first. Lead by example, right? That’s really relevant. But is it going to do anything? It doesn’t seem to be fixing it. It just means I’m paying more money for my baloney sandwich, for my cord of wood, for everything, and it’s not fixing the problem. It’s not changing anything. So why are we doing it?

So, should we vote for the amendment? Let’s tell the federal government we don’t want to pay any more money. We want them to stop charging tax for all the stuff that we enjoy, those goods and services that we really, really appreciate and that we love as Canadians. Or should we ask the federal government to stop a tax that absolutely is not fixing the problem they want to solve?

And then when you look at—I’m going to use a personal example. Here I am, the member for Sault Ste. Marie. My local steel plant—one of only three steel manufacturers in the country, all three of which are here in the province of Ontario, two in Hamilton, one in Sault Ste. Marie—Algoma Steel, greening its steel, reducing carbon emissions, a huge economic investment, a huge benefit, actually making a difference on the environment at a huge level by making critical investments that our government has made without resorting to a carbon tax, without jamming our hands as deep as we can into every single business and thinking that it’s going to change anything other than them then making us pay for it.

I say we get rid of the carbon tax, Madam Speaker. To me, I would say I have really, really honestly considered the member’s amendment to the motion, but personally, I’m not convinced. And as I’m speaking, I don’t know, I hope I convinced a few people here today that the amendment doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense.

Good morning, everybody. It’s a pleasure to be here to have the opportunity to debate this fine motion and amendment to it. As many of you have heard me say, when I speak and when we look at the types of resolutions that we look at to fix the various problems that we try to fix, I always like to begin with looking at what is it that we are trying to solve and what’s the problem we’re trying to solve.

Well, obviously we’re dealing with some significant cost increases across the board. People are dealing with inflation. They’re struggling to be able to put food on the table. They’re struggling to be able to pay their rent. They’re struggling with being able to buy their groceries and heat their homes and put gas in their cars, or struggling to be able to get a bus pass. The struggles just are quite significant.

We are the government, and the reason why we are the government is because people have a lot of problems and they have elected us to fix those problems, because when the coalition of the Liberals and the NDP were in power, they caused all these problems. While they were causing all these problems, the people saw how terrible they were at effectively managing anything, so they decided to elect some people that they thought were going to be a lot better at managing things. I think the people have spoken, Madam Speaker.

Interjection.

So it’s incumbent on us as members in this House to recognize what the people of this province—all across this province in every single riding and every corner of it—what they are saying and what they’re concerned about. Right now, one of the principal concerns is affordability. It’s a basic reference. So, again, back to the question, what is the problem we need to solve? And the problem is affordability. Now, the nature of the motion that is before us and the amendment to the motion is to call upon the federal government to do something. So in this case, we’re calling upon our brothers and sisters in the—

Interjections.

And so, again, I ask, what is the problem we’re trying to solve and how will this amendment or this motion address that? I challenge myself because in order to answer that question, you have to get to the root, right? You must come to the root, and the root, ultimately, as the amendment is addressing an HST issue, the motion is addressing a carbon tax issue—which is all, again, aimed at how do we fix this affordability problem.

Well, you have to ask yourself what each one of those taxes—what they were all about. The HST, obviously, has been around for a very long time. The GST before it was around for a very long time. The carbon tax is a recent issue, and it comes about for very different reasons, so let’s focus there as a starting point.

The carbon tax: My understanding—I stand to be corrected, Madam Speaker—is, somehow, a tax that was contemplated, envisioned, would solve certain environmental problems. They would produce people’s environmental impact. It would protect the environment. Okay—in theory, I can understand how that works. But in so doing, we’re taxing businesses on just about everything we do—literally, quite frankly, everything, whether it’s your food—you know, we’re hearing people talk about what it costs to run a fan, to dry our foods off before we can put them out to market so they don’t rot or mould.

We’re talking about how much it costs me to fuel gas in my home, and I don’t even use that much. My own home—I burn a lot of wood. I just had my three sons and myself getting ready for the winter. We’re prepping our woodshed. We’re getting everything set. My wood cost has gone up $10 a cord and they’re telling me it’s because of the cost of fuel. All of these costs just keep on growing and growing and growing.

Me heating my home with wood is a little bit more environmentally friendly than using natural gas. Now, I’ve got to pay more money for that. Okay, I can understand that. But is it going to fix the problem? Is it going to fix the grander issue of protecting the environment? Those costs are just getting pushed on to me, the end user. The cost of that bologna sandwich is just going up, but the person who is paying for it is that end user. I used to bring my kids to Subway a lot after soccer practice. We used to always go to Subway; it was a thing. Until I went to Subway recently and a sub cost me, and a diet Pepsi—it was like $18, for one. I mean, you multiply that out by the whole family and I’m thinking, that’s a really expensive lunch, right? That’s a really, really expensive lunch. Why am I paying that price? It’s because of all of these costs going up, and I’m just paying for it.

So, is the environment getting protected? Did anybody stop doing anything to hurt the environment because they had these taxes? No, they’re just paying more money to do the business that they’re doing, and they’re making me pay for it. It’s a really challenging situation that now I’m just paying for and you’re paying for and the member for Niagara is paying for and all of his constituents are paying for—but again, are his constituents seeing any changes in the world? Are they seeing the impact of the carbon tax fixing the environment? I’d love to know if the member actually sees a change in the environment because of all the extra costs his constituents are paying, for basic items like a fried egg in the morning.

Interjection.