“I support this bill, but it does not do enough. Life is too expensive for Canadians right now. The government needs to cut more taxes on gas, remove sales tax on new homes, and stop wasting billions of dollars.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will start off where I ended just before question period, just to say that one tax cut on one product does not undo an affordability crisis 11 years in the making. Let us just be clear about where Canadians actually stand today. Nearly one in four families cannot afford the housing they live in. One in 10 people in Toronto relies on a food bank. Gas still sits over $1.80 a litre in Toronto today, and over $2.06 a litre in Vancouver, the highest gas price in the country. Inflation sits at 3%, the top edge of what the Bank of Canada considers tolerable, and we lost 42,000 jobs in August alone before the latest round of tariffs even hit. Behind every one of those numbers is somebody like Hamid, a constituent who wrote me this month. Despite doing everything right, searching for work, trying to keep up, he told me that he is now in debt and struggling to afford basic necessities, including a pair of glasses that he needs to see clearly. We are in Canada. That is not a policy footnote. That is not just some random example. These are real people with real stories. That is the real cost of 11 years of decisions made in this building. That is the story that the government needs to hear, because the promise of this country has always been simple: If a person works hard and follows the rules, the country works for them too. Right now, for too many Canadians, it simply is not working. If the government is serious about affordability and not just borrowing language along with our policies, here is how the Liberals could finish the job they started today. Go further on gas. Do not just cut the excise tax, but scrap the clean fuel standard and the GST on fuel too. That is another 15¢ a litre for every fill-up, and 15¢ a litre on every fill-up for a guy like Hamid means something. In fact, it means something for a lot of Canadians right across the country who are struggling. Do not stop at March. Hold it for a full year or longer if Canadians are not seeing the benefit by then. That is roughly $1,000 back in the pockets of every average family, not a few hundred, but $1,000, and that is a meaningful difference. Scrap the GST on new homes. That alone can save a family $65,000 on a new build. It is the difference between renting forever and actually owning a place they can call their own for their families, to have kids and for their kids to have. Get the spending under control. We have said this before. The government has doubled the deficit it inherited. In fact, it was the front members on the Liberals’ bench who added to that deficit. They have actually inherited something they have done themselves. We have identified $150 billion in savings, which is roughly $10,000 for a Canadian family. That is the cost of three and a half average Canadian mortgage payments. That is real relief for real families everywhere across the country. The Liberals can find this savings by cutting consultants. They can find it by cutting corporate welfare, boondoggles like the Alto rail project or a gravel pit launch pad that went nowhere. That money can go back to Canadians, or at minimum it could stop being borrowed against their children’s future. None of this is complicated. A tank of gas should not cost a day’s wages. A home should not cost a lifetime savings for a down payment. Everyone in this place knows that this is not an ideological position. This is how this country is supposed to work. This is the deal that this country has on offer for every single Canadian, no matter where they came from and how they got there. I will close with this. It is day two after three months of silence from the other side, and we have already passed something real, or we are about to. Imagine what could have been done for Canadians if this House had sat all summer, instead of shielding the government from questions it did not want to answer. Imagine if it was not all summits and MOUs, and it was real relief for real people who are undoubtedly scratching their heads today and wondering if this year is going to be any different than last year or the year before. What is before us today is a step. It is a small one in the right direction, and we think it should go further. We will keep saying this every single day. We will keep saying it for the millions of Canadians who have entrusted us with the responsibility to fight for a more affordable future in this country, to fight to save them money, to fight for every single Canadian no matter where they live, where they came from and how they got here. We will support the bill and we will push until the government actually finishes the work that we started for it.”

• Echo ×4

  A repeated line

  “The Conservatives have identified $150 billion in potential savings.”

  Said 4 times by 4 members since September 21.

  Every time it was said →

“The government talks about big promises and meetings, but nothing gets built. These promises do not help Canadians pay for gas, food, or their homes.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is still all talk and no results, and we will continue to see no results. What we cannot do with commitments on projects that cannot get built in this country is fill a car full of gas. We cannot put food on the table. We cannot pay our mortgage. Every single Canadian who is scratching their head wondering what these summits and MOUs mean for affordability in this country is going to continue to keep scratching, while the member all the way from Winnipeg looks to Toronto and looks at a bunch of commitments that are not real.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 21 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →
• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“Liberal promises do not help people buy food, and their policies made a car company leave Ingersoll. Conservatives want to cut the tax on gas so Canadians have enough money to drive to work, take their kids to school, and buy food.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North just talked about commitments. Well, we cannot eat commitments. Let us ask the people in Ingersoll about Stellantis and those commitments, which all left our country because of the Liberals’ failed policies. Every Conservative here is here to save money for Canadians. How much money would Canadians have saved if the Liberals had actually taken our policy months and months and years ago to take the tax off gas so they would be able to drive to their work and actually take their kids to school and put food on the table?”

“Canadians could have saved a lot more money on fuel. The government should pass this bill and go further by ending the clean fuel rule. That would permanently cut gas prices by 15 cents a litre. Government energy rules have cost jobs and kept private investment away for the last 11 years.”

“Mr. Speaker, the answer is simple: It is a whole lot more. What I want to say is, on this side of the House, for the last 11 years, we had members turning themselves in circles, screaming about burning the earth down because we would lower the price of gas in this country. Let us make no mistake about it, they can go a lot further. They can scrap the clean fuel standard and make sure to take 15¢ a litre off the price of gas for eternity, but they are not doing that. That is a policy choice. The member brings up a good point on the summit. We cannot put a commitment in our gas tank. We cannot put a commitment on our table. For so long, this deal book has been full of deals that Canadian private capital said no to long ago. They said no because of the job-killing, energy-killing policies of the last 11 years that are continuing from the government.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 42 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“The NDP member is right that Parliament was shut down for three months. During that time, the government refused to answer to Canadians about high living costs. That is the biggest crisis facing our country.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is rare when I agree with my NDP colleague, but a clock is right twice a day. He is right about one thing. This place was shut down for three months, and nobody from the government, including a whole bunch of backbench Liberal MPs who probably do not know the answer because they are not in the know either, along with a number of ministers, would answer to the Canadian people on the biggest crisis we face. That biggest crisis is affordability. It is an affordability crisis for every single Canadian, an affordability crisis that has people scratching their heads as to why these guys do not come to work and why these guys do not answer to the public.”

“I support cutting fuel taxes because Canadians cannot afford food, rent, or gas. The government only paused the fuel tax because Conservatives pushed for it. The government must go further. They should end all carbon taxes and fuel taxes, stop deficit spending, and approve resource projects to make life cheaper.”

“Mr. Speaker, allow me to quote Robin, a widowed mother who wrote to me on Canada Day. She said that people talk about affordability in numbers but that she measures it differently. She measures it by the moments her kids ask, “Mom, can I have a three-dollar snack?”, and she says, “No, it’s rent week.” I also heard from Jennifer LaFramboise, a mother of four, who said that she owns a home and is working three jobs, one full-time and two part-time, trying to make ends meet. There are days when she has to invent new meals for her family to eat because she has four dollars left in her bank account until her next paycheque. She gets food only on apps such as Flashfood now, because that is all she can afford: discounted meals. She lives less than pay to pay, because her pay is never enough to meet anything on her bills. Mike, a firefighter, business owner and father of three who lives in metro Vancouver, said that he and his wife work full-time. His wife is an educational assistant in the public school system, supporting teachers and children with diverse needs every day. Mike serves his community as a firefighter while also operating a small landscaping business. Between them, they are effectively working the equivalent of three jobs while raising three kids. Mike said that, despite all their efforts, it was only recently that they managed to purchase their first home, a modest 1,200-square-foot townhouse that cost $879,000. He says that they are doing everything society asks of them: They work hard, pay their taxes and raise their children. They contribute to their community. However, they are barely keeping their heads above water. Mike says that he is burning the candle at both ends and is running out of candle. Another single mother says that she has worked hard her entire life. She does not receive child support, and she does not expect handouts. She wants hard work to mean something again. The Prime Minister tells Robin, Jennifer, Mike and the single mother that “Affordability is the best it has been in over a decade.” He said those words in March on the floor of the House of Commons. On behalf of them and all the hard-working Canadians who are scraping and scratching to survive in this terrible inflationary economy, let me say that the Prime Minister is out of touch and Canadians are out of money. If he thinks these are just selective anecdotes, I have hundreds, probably thousands, more in my correspondence. All the members of the Conservative caucus could share stories just like these ones. These are the people we bump into on Main Street. They are the people who show up at food banks. They are the people who are still courageously and heroically volunteering for local charities while they can barely afford to feed themselves. These are the people we will not meet on the summit floor, nor will we see them at a salon in Davos nor on the Prime Minister’s private jet, where he spends thousands of other people’s tax dollars on meals. No, these are the people on the ground, and they are the people for whom we as Conservatives will fight every day and every way on the floor of the House of Commons. If the Prime Minister does not like stories, then let us go with some statistics. Rising prices at the grocery store have doubled food insecurity from 5.1% in 2017 to 10.5% last year, according to the Agri-Food Analytics Lab. A Royal Bank study found that more than half of parents with adult children aged 18 to 40 provide financial support, contributing, on average, $6,100 a year. Nearly one in five elderly people is forced to give $10,000 to support their adult children. According to the Telus mental health index, cost of living is the top financial stressor for two-thirds of workers. The federal government’s largest national count found that homelessness was 59% higher in 2022, with unsheltered homelessness up 89%. Consumer insolvencies in the second quarter of this year, the most recently reported one, were 37,523. That is the number of people who are selling everything so they do not have to declare bankruptcy. In fact, insolvencies are now at their highest level since the great global recession. The Prime Minister dares tell these people who are losing their homes and everything they worked so hard to acquire that they have never had it so good, and that affordability is the best it has been in a decade. These are the stories the government would love to silence, that it would like to gaslight out of existence by telling us affordability is great. These are the stories we do not hear from the mainstream media, which would have covered it all up in order to protect the Liberal government. We will not be silenced. We as Conservatives will be telling these stories on the floor of the House of Commons and offering real solutions to save Canadians money on gas, groceries, rent and mortgage payments. That includes tackling the inflationary taxes and deficits of the Prime Minister, which have worsened under his leadership. In fact, the deficit has doubled since he took office. The Liberals inherited a large deficit from themselves, and they managed to double it in a very short period of time. We are relieved to see that our efforts to fight gas taxes have led to a temporary pause on part of those taxes. The Liberals we know would not have cut one penny off the gas tax for one minute had it not been for the relentless fighting and advocacy of the Conservatives on this side of the House, and we will keep fighting. We are only getting started. The reality is that there are three taxes on gas. There is the excise tax, which we have forced the government to pause. There is the GST, which the government continues to collect and from which it continues to profit on higher gas prices because it is a percentage-based tax. Then, of course, there is the fuel standard tax. The Prime Minister said on the floor of the House of Commons yesterday that this tax adds zero to gas prices. His own Environment Canada website says that it is seven cents per litre right now and that within three and a half years it will be 17¢ per litre, the same rate as the previous Liberal consumer carbon tax. The only difference is that this carbon tax does not have a rebate, which makes it even worse. Our message is to get rid of the fuel standard tax and the industrial carbon tax forever, and to get rid of the other gas taxes until at least Canada Day. This would save Canadians 25¢ a litre, 20 bucks a fill-up, and about $1,000 total, money that real people who are fighting every day just to raise their families could definitely use in order to build their lives. The Prime Minister said yesterday as well that the industrial carbon tax has zero impact on food prices. I am not surprised that he is confused on this, because he famously said that Canadians do not use steel anymore. Let me tell the House that not only do Canadians use steel, but farmers use steel. Their equipment is made out of steel. When we tax the steel that goes into farm equipment and then tax the fertilizer that goes on the crops, which the Prime Minister has done, we tax all the food that comes from those crops. That is why, while there are some global factors, the reality is that Canada has had the worst food price inflation for most of the Prime Minister’s tenure in office, worse than the U.S., worse than the U.K., and worse than Italy, Japan, Germany and France. It is worse because his policies are worse. By reversing all of these taxes, we could bring down the cost of food and everything else. Furthermore, do members know what else lowers the price when we purchase something? It is having a stronger dollar. We have a weak dollar right now because of the decade-long policy of the Liberal government to try to keep our most valuable export, oil and gas, in the ground. The Prime Minister was the global champion of net zero, saying that we needed to keep half of oil and gas in the ground. He promised that he would reverse himself on these policies, but since the last election, what have we seen? Yesterday he introduced a bill that he promised is going to speed up projects. That is what he promised 18 months ago. He introduced a bill called the Building Canada Act. What did it do? In 18 months, it has not approved a single, solitary project across this country. We do not need another announcement. We do not need another press conference or summit. We need a real bill that would scrap all the antidevelopment laws, approve the 500 projects that are waiting for permits, and unlock and unblock our resources so we can bring them to the surface and bring strength to our dollar and purchasing power to the Canadian people so the hard-working people whose stories I told at the beginning will be rewarded, and so the promise of Canada will mean they can have a beautiful house, food on the table, a safe street and a mortgage they can pay down.”

“The government's plans are bankrupting Canadians. Food bank use has doubled since 2019, and people cannot pay their bills. If the government's programs actually worked, people would not be hungry and homeless. We need real results instead of more talk.”

“Madam Speaker, it is because the entire package the Liberal government has brought forward is bankrupting Canadians. They cannot afford to pay the cost of the Liberal government. If any of those programs actually worked, we would not have double the number of people lined up at food banks, a number that has gone up by 100% since 2019 and continues to go up under the Prime Minister. If his whole basket of programs were actually working, we would not be getting letters from people such as Robin, Mike and Jennifer, who say they cannot pay their bills. We would not have the devastating statistics showing how many people are going hungry and homeless. What we want is more results and less talk. We will fight every day and every way for Canada and for Canadians.”

“Seniors' benefits should rise with the real cost of living, and I support making life cheaper for them. The government's record spending and deficits cause the high prices that are wiping out seniors' savings. Their adult children now need help just to pay rent or buy a home. We will fight for seniors and the next generation.”

“Madam Speaker, absolutely, benefits should be indexed to the real cost of living. Absolutely, we will always support measures to make life affordable for our seniors, to save seniors money. That is the opposite of what the Liberal government has done over the last decade by inflating the cost of living with record deficits. This year, the deficit is the biggest it has ever been outside COVID. Government spending as a share of GDP is the highest it has been since 1996. That inflation is destroying the savings and purchasing power of our hard-working seniors. They are getting less for the money they set aside. On top of that, their adult children have to come asking for help for a down payment or just to avoid rent eviction. We are fighting for these seniors, for their kids, for all generations and for Canada’s promise.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“I want the House to pass this bill. Canadians cannot afford their bills, and the government should lower fuel costs instead of attacking oil and gas. We need low energy prices and more Canadian oil and gas.”

“Madam Speaker, Canadians are running for their lives to try to pay their bills. I would note that we could fight wildfires if we had water bombers instead of spending half a trillion dollars fighting oil and gas and fighting against Canadians using gas at the pump, as the member suggests. However, I can understand why she is heartbroken. For a decade, the Liberal Prime Minister said that he supported net-zero policies, that he wanted to keep more than half our oil and gas in the ground and that he wanted even higher and broader carbon taxes. He now claims to have changed his mind. He never believed it. It was all a money grab from the very start. We on this side have been consistent. We are fighting for affordability, for low energy prices and for the massive production of our oil, gas and other resources.”

• Personal attack
  ?

  Reply to a comment in debate

  Respect 96 of 100

  This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “He never believed it”.

  See full analysis →

“The government has to give people grocery rebates because its policies made food too expensive. Why did the member vote against our plan to take the tax off gas?”

“Madam Speaker, the member went through all the programs that Canadians have, including the new grocery rebate. Is that really an admission that their policies are failing? The fact that they have to give Canadians more money back in programs means they cannot afford food on their own. The member has been in the House for a while. Why did she vote against our motion to take the tax off gas four or five times last spring?”

“The government is copying our plan to cut fuel taxes. I want the member to explain why he voted against this exact idea several times last session, when it could have saved Canadians money a year ago.”

“Madam Speaker, they say that imitation is the finest form of flattery. We are flattered that the government is finally taking some of our policies to save Canadians money. That is why Conservatives came here: to make sure that Canadians have more money in their pockets. This is my question, and the previous Liberal speaker did not answer it: I am wondering why the member voted against our motion to remove the tax on gas four or five times last session. Canadians could have been saving money for almost a year, rather than bringing this forward now. Why did he vote against his constituents’ having more money in their pockets when we brought this exact motion forward last session?”

“I support this bill to keep pausing the fuel tax, but it does not go far enough. Life is too expensive for families, seniors, and small businesses. The government should remove all federal taxes on gas and diesel until July 2027 to save people more money.”

“Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the great people of the riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge. Canadians are struggling with the cost of living, and every single dollar matters, whether it be the parent filling up the family car before taking the kids to school, the tradesperson driving from job site to job site or the truck driver delivering food that ends up in our grocery stores. It certainly matters to the families in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge who are trying to make their paycheques stretch a little further each month. When I am at the east or west Woodbridge seniors clubs, the topic on everyone’s mind is how expensive life has gotten. For seniors, OAS and CPP do not go far enough. As for their grandkids, they feel that life is unaffordable and they will never be able to get ahead. It has been a year and a half since the Liberals were elected, and many are wondering how life has changed, how their lives have been made better. Yes, there are many global challenges that further complicate the problem, including the unjustified tariffs on our country, but many of the affordability concerns that Canadians are talking about predate this, and many of them are self-inflicted after almost 11 years now of bad government policy. There have been many announcements from the government, but we have seen very little progress. We see a government that is great at marketing its announcements but very little action. I would submit that things have actually gotten worse. The Liberals in the last year and a half have doubled the deficit and added hundreds of billions of dollars of new spending above the reckless levels inherited from the previous disastrous Trudeau Liberal government. One need look no further than the fact that we are now at the highest levels of government spending as a share of the economy since 1996 and have the biggest deficit outside of COVID in Canadian history. As a member of His Majesty’s loyal opposition, it is my job to hold the government accountable, question its expenditures and, yes, agree where there is room to agree. Just yesterday, when I asked a question in the House on the cost of retaliatory tariffs for Canadians, the government House leader proceeded to act as if such a question was part of a “‘blame Canada’ pattern”. I mean, how dare the Conservative opposition ask a simple question of basic economics to the Liberal government? We know transparency is not the Liberals’ strong suit. Following months of Conservative calls to extend gas tax relief for Canadians, the federal government decided to suspend the excise tax on gasoline and diesel in April, providing relief of 10¢ per litre on gasoline and four cents per litre on diesel. This suspension was originally scheduled to expire after Labour Day, but the government has now introduced legislation to extend it to January 2027. For Canadians who depend on their vehicles, and for businesses that depend on affordable transportation, the extension provides additional relief. It also raises an important question about what happens when that relief expires. Conservatives have constantly called for greater relief, and we believe the government should go even further by removing all federal taxes on gasoline and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027, which would save Canadians 25¢ per litre and provide an annual savings of $1,200 per family. I will also note that when Conservatives proposed to remove the federal excise tax on fuel for a longer time, Liberals downplayed it as having little to no impact on affordability for Canadians. I would also like to say that I will be splitting my time with the member for Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière. How much could that wasted time and delay have saved Canadians? Let us think about it. We had a motion in this very House on this exact issue that the Liberals voted against several months prior. We have seen this before. The Liberals backtracked on their previous narrative regarding their tax policy. Exhibit A is the consumer carbon tax. As the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands suggested earlier today, the Liberals are plagiarizing parts of our platform for their own, and it is no surprise that they are because that is exactly what Canadians need to address issues of affordability and the cost of living. Fuel taxes drive up costs for Canadians, and the impact extends well beyond the gas station. When fuel costs rise, the consequences are felt throughout the economy, and ultimately, those costs find their ways into the wallets of every single Canadian. Let us consider what happens before a family even walks into a grocery store. A farmer needs fuel to operate equipment and produce food. A trucking company needs diesel to transport that food. A distributor needs to move it to a warehouse, and another truck delivers it to a grocery store. Every stage involves transportation, and every single stage has costs. When fuel becomes more expensive, businesses face pressure to absorb these costs, reduce spending elsewhere or pass some of those expenditures along to the customers. That is why Conservatives have been calling for the government to go further. Lower fuel costs can help families at the pump while easing some of the pressures facing the businesses that produce and deliver the goods Canadians rely on. As someone who spent 20 years in industry, I understand the importance of getting materials from a supplier to a factory and the finished product from a factory to a customer. The manufacturing transportation costs are part of the price of doing business. It is a top-three line item on most financial statements. A company might be doing everything it can to improve productivity, control expenses and remain competitive, but it still needs to purchase fuel to move its products. When those costs rise, it can put additional pressure on the company’s margins and ability to compete. This is particularly relevant today when Canadian manufacturers are already navigating significant uncertainty in their trade relationship with the largest market, the United States. For businesses in Vaughan—Woodbridge and across Ontario, transportation costs are one of several factors that determine whether they can offer competitive prices, attract orders and maintain employment. Fuel tax relief can help with one of those pressures. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business has also reported significant financial pressure among small businesses. Among those who considered it a bad time to start a business, 88% cited high costs, 65% pointed at taxes and 53% identified government red tape. These are Canadians who invest their savings, take risks and employ people in our communities. When their costs rise, it can become harder to expand, invest in new equipment, hire workers or offer competitive pricing. Conservatives also called for reforms to federal permitting, taxation and regulation to address Canada’s broader competitive challenges. For example, we have learned that there are over 100,000 different regulations on the manufacturing sector alone. The decisions Parliament makes on fuel taxes are a part of that discussion. I want to turn to the experience of younger Canadians. The finance minister claimed his government is fighting every day for young people and their generation, yet a recent RBC report highlights that more than half of Canadian parents are financially supporting their adult children, giving an average of $6,100 just last year. Young Canadians should not need the bank of mom and dad to afford groceries and rent. A significant portion of Canada’s brain drain is because of the cost of living for our young people. Conservatives have raised concerns about the scale of federal spending, the deficit and the long-term costs of servicing public debt. Those concerns deserve careful consideration when the government is asking Canadians to accept that further fuel tax relief cannot be sustained beyond next spring. Bill C-38 also presents an opportunity to consider the broader fuel tax proposal. Conservatives have called for removing all federal taxes on gasoline and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027, including the GST on fuel, while also proposing changes to the clean fuel regulations and the permanent elimination of the industrial carbon tax. The government has estimated that extending the existing tax suspension will provide an additional $2.9 billion in tax relief. That makes the scheduled return of the tax particularly important to examine. If the government recognizes that fuel tax relief can help Canadians and Canadian businesses manage rising costs, Parliament should understand why the relief is scheduled to end on April 1. The families I represent in Vaughan—Woodbridge are looking for greater financial security. They want to know that their children have opportunities to purchase a home, that their businesses can remain competitive and that their paycheques will cover the costs of everyday life.”

“Life is too expensive for Canadians right now. I want the government to extend this fuel tax cut even longer and work with us on other ways to lower costs. We need lower taxes and fewer business rules so Canada can compete with the United States.”

“Madam Speaker, we are facing a major affordability crisis, and in that same spirit of collaboration, we would like to see the government extend this fuel tax break even further. We would also like to see it take some of our other ideas on affordability. We have a serious problem with regulations that have a stranglehold on the Canadian economy. We need serious tax reform. I believe it was a Liberal prime minister, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, who once said that if Canada wants to be competitive with the United States, the largest market, it is not going to be a market competition. We have to have a more competitive regulatory system and a much more competitive tax system. I would like to see the Liberals collaborate with us on those things to increase affordability for Canadians.”

“Seniors in our community are struggling to pay for rent, groceries, and taxes, and more of them are using food banks. The Liberals claim they solved this problem, but they left seniors behind. I want the member to explain how he will answer to the seniors we represent.”

“Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge is doing a fantastic job. I want to ask him how he would explain to the 22 seniors clubs in our jurisdiction that 8.3% of food bank clients are seniors and that number is growing. We hear those concerns every single time we attend seniors events. They are struggling with taxes, rent and buying groceries. We know the affordability crisis is real in this country, and yet the Liberals claim they have solved the affordability crisis. How will the member explain to the seniors we represent in our community that the Liberals did not take them into consideration?”

“The Liberals have spent 11 years hurting Canada's economy, and now they take credit for programs that try to fix the damage they caused. We need them to work with us to fix the tax system, build energy projects, and lower taxes for people and businesses.”

“Madam Speaker, we see a theme here. The Liberal government spends 11 years recklessly destroying the Canadian economy and then wants to take credit for programs that it institutes to apparently help subsidize the people in the economy that it destroyed. To answer the member’s question, we need to see the spirit of collaboration on serious things like tax reform, on things that will help us build up our leverage in trade negotiations and that will help promote competitiveness. We would like to see the Liberals actually start building energy infrastructure so we can take advantage of this unique opportunity to capitalize on our natural resources, so we can lower business and personal tax for people and really target key industries and see them thrive. We have everything we need in this country. We just need the Liberals onside to promote these ideas.”

“Canada has a lot of natural resources. Canadians want the government to act fast to build infrastructure and export these resources, just as it promised.”

“Madam Speaker, the constituents from Vaughan—Woodbridge and, frankly, Canadians right across this entire country recognize the unique position that Canada is in with our large natural resources that we sit upon. What they would like to see the government do is move at speeds not seen before, like it promised in the last election, so we can develop the infrastructure, export our natural resources and build up this country for everybody.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 47 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“I support this bill because it pauses the fuel tax, but it does not go far enough. High gas prices make life and food too expensive, especially in rural areas where people must drive. We should cut all federal taxes on fuel until July 2027 to save families over $1,000 a year.”

“Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague for his excellent speech. I want to address those watching this debate closely at home, because people all across Canada are feeling the strain of the cost of living. Families are working, paying their bills and doing what they have always done, but unfortunately, many of them are finding that they have less and less money left in their pockets at the end of the month. A recent study showed that people have less than $100 left in their pockets at the end of the month to make ends meet. One hundred dollars is not a lot. Quebeckers are also facing this challenge. They see it at the grocery store, in the cost of housing and insurance and even every time they have to stop at the gas station to fill up. Behind the numbers we are discussing here in Ottawa, the statistics and examples from overseas, lies a very different challenge for families. Families have to make choices, put off purchases because they cannot afford them or cut back just to be able to pay for essentials, such as heating, groceries or school supplies. In short, they have to make tough choices. That is why it is time to get back to basics in Canada. It is time to save Canadians money by cutting the taxes and government spending that are making absolutely everything more expensive, as I mentioned earlier. It is time to protect Canadians’ jobs and to keep Canadians safe. It is not right that people in Canada have to think twice before going out at night because they do not feel safe. Why is that? It is because, over the past few years, the government has implemented reforms that make it easier to put criminals back on the streets than in prison. What I just said is no joke. It is the truth. It is also time to fix our immigration system and put Canada first. We, the Conservatives, have identified nearly $150 billion in potential savings in government spending. That is $10,000 in savings per family in taxes. When we talk about saving Canadians money, we need to look at the expenses they have to cover every week. Gas and fuel are part of that. For millions of Canadians, especially Quebeckers who live in rural areas, filling up is not an expense they can simply decide to put off until later. In my riding of Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, a car is a necessity, not a luxury. People need a car to get to work, drive the kids to school and activities, go grocery shopping and get to medical appointments. In short, they need a car to get everywhere they need to go. There are no subway stops every block or buses that come by every 10 minutes in our municipalities. When we look at the Régie de l’énergie du Québec’s data on the price of gas, that has a direct effect on our communities. If we use the published gas prices to calculate how much it will cost to fill up a 60-litre tank, it quickly adds up to over a hundred dollars per fill-up. That is a recurring weekly expense for many workers in Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière and all regions of Quebec. Drivers in Estrie called into the radio station 107.7 to say that they are now cutting back on their trips to save on gas so they can get around when it is truly essential. When people start changing their travel habits just to save on gas they cannot afford, it shows just how much the price at the pump is eating into their budgets. As I said, this is not limited to the Estrie region. On September 17, the price of gas was $2.80 per litre at some gas stations in Montreal. The provincial average was $1.96 per litre. In some regions, the situation is even worse. In Radisson, in northern Quebec, the price of gas recently reached $2.37 per litre. This shows how much of a burden fuel costs can be for families who have no choice but to travel by car. When we talk about affordability, we are talking about the ability of Quebec and Canadian families to pay for essential expenses. Right now, Canadians are benefiting from a pause on the federal fuel excise tax. Bill C‑38, which we are discussing today, will extend the full suspension until January 31, 2027. A rate equal to 50% of the regular excise tax rate will be in effect during February and March, before the regular rate resumes in the spring. What does that mean in practical terms? It means that the federal tax on gas and diesel will be suspended, but that as of February 1, it will go back up to 50% of the regular rate. Then, on April 1, according to today’s announcement, the price of gas will not decrease but rather will go back up again. The regular rates will be reinstated. The relief that Canadians are receiving now is already supposed to decrease in February and March of next year. For a family that needs to gas up regularly, sometimes for two vehicles, these costs add up. We must not forget that the extension was announced after months of Conservative calls for the government to keep the fuel tax relief going. We introduced two opposition motions in the House asking for all fuel taxes to be suspended, meaning the clean fuel tax, the GST and the excise tax, not just until Labour Day, but until July 1 next year. Both times, the Conservatives were the only ones to vote in favour of these motions. The Liberals voted no, the Bloc Québécois voted no and the NDP voted no. Under pressure, the government came to realize that it would be foolish to kick off the parliamentary session by raising the price of gas by 10¢ per litre for everyone. People would associate the price hike with the Liberals, so the Liberals decided to pick a quieter time, over the winter, when people will not be paying much attention to what is going on. However, winter is when people need their vehicles the most. Riding a bike is not an option; there are no other options. People need their vehicles even more. Today, the Liberals are saying that on February 1, when it will be -40°C out, gas prices are going to rise by five cents a litre. That is the proposal before us today. In our opinion, we need to go further. If lowering fuel taxes lets families and workers keep more of their own money, that is the direction we should take. Families will still be paying their bills in February. They will still be going places. Workers in Thetford Mines will still be going to work. Families in Lac‑Mégantic will still have to drive their kids to their activities. Farmers in Lotbinière will still have to keep farming. Truckers will still have to keep transporting goods. Expenses never take a holiday. As the Conservatives see it, an extension of a few months is good, but not good enough. Bill C-38 offers some relief, but it is only a half measure. What we need is to pause all gas taxes until July 1, 2027, and then see how the economy is doing and whether enough time has passed for the market to normalize. If the Liberals’ projects were actually moving as quickly as they claim they are, we could be producing more oil here in Canada. That would help lower gas prices for everyone, but unfortunately, we hear a lot of talk from that side of the House, but we see very little action when it comes to actually delivering anything. Our proposal would result in savings of 25¢ per litre, or more than $1,000 a year for a Canadian family. On a 60-litre fill-up, as I said earlier, that means $15 in savings. That is right, $15 on a single fill-up. Multiply that by the 52 weeks in a year, since drivers usually fill up at least once a week, and we get savings of over $1,000 a year, which could make a real difference in a family’s budget. As we know, Bill C‑38 deals only with the federal government. When we say we need to go a little further, it is because we can take action on the things in our control. We do control the three taxes I mentioned, and if the Liberal government wanted to, it could provide relief to families for a little longer. Rising gas prices also have a very negative impact. Every time the price of gas and diesel goes up, the price of our food goes up. Marc Cadieux, president of the Association du camionnage du Québec, was very clear on this, saying that fuel is the second-highest cost for carriers and that this increase is ultimately passed on to consumers. There is a dual impact. The government is going to raise taxes for everyone, and then that tax increase will once again be passed on to everyone. At the end of the day, who pays? It is always the consumer who pays. In closing, I want to add one more thing. We need to cut taxes even further to ease the pressure on Canadians’ wallets. In Quebec’s regions, filling up a gas tank is not optional, and neither is paying taxes. However, when we can control that and help people, we must do so. That is the decision that needs to be made. I hope that the government will realize that some day.”

“The Liberals criticized us for years for wanting to get rid of the carbon tax. Now they support ending it and cutting fuel taxes too. These were Conservative ideas first. I am glad if they adopt our plans to save Canadians money, but they should admit where the ideas came from.”

“Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, who never fails to surprise us when he takes the floor. He is trying to give the credit for our ideas, the ones that were proposed and brought forward here by the Conservatives, to the new Prime Minister, who is part of the same government as the former Liberal government. We spent years saying that the federal carbon tax should be abolished. That very same MP criticized us for wanting that. He said we were going to destroy the planet. What has happened? Now there is a new leader who has suddenly become an advocate of abolishing the carbon tax. Unbelievable. Now, that party is embracing the idea of reducing the excise tax on gasoline. Frankly, the Liberals are welcome to adopt plenty more ideas like that if they save Canadians money. I have no problem with them implementing our policies, but they should let us know every now and then when they are going to take ideas from our playbook. Canadians know that there is only one party looking after their wallets, and that is the Conservative Party.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 28 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“I want the government to pause all taxes on gas until July 1, 2027. I am not defending big oil companies, but cutting these taxes is the fastest way to save Canadians money.”

“Madam Speaker, I will not defend the big oil and gas companies. I come from a region that was a victim of the gas cartel. Companies have to reimburse a lot of people in my riding because they were fixing gas prices together. I am not here to make their court case, but I must say that, what we can control right now, immediately, is the tax on gas to provide some relief to Canadians. I am asking the government again to please suspend all taxes on gas until July, 1 2027. Let us save money for Canadians.”

“The new Prime Minister is copying Conservative ideas, but doing it too slowly. I want my colleague to comment on this.”

“Madam Speaker, Conservatives have been pointing out all day that the new Prime Minister has been implementing the Conservative agenda, at perhaps about half speed. I am just wondering if my hon. colleague has any comments about that.”