Canadian Fuel Affordability Act

Bill C-38, Canadian Fuel Affordability Act · Second reading · now law Where it stands

What the law does

The law extends the temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax until January 31, 2027. Between February 1, 2027, and March 31, 2027, excise tax rates on fuels are set at 50% of their regular rates.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

92 statements

François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance and National Revenue

Liberal
“I want the House to pass this bill quickly. It cuts federal fuel taxes until early 2027 to lower gas prices for families and businesses.”
  • A repeated line

    “We introduced the Canada groceries and essentials benefit.”

    Said 29 times by 19 members since April 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

moved that Bill C-38, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act (extension of the federal fuel excise tax relief), be read the second time and referred to a committee. He said: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be back here this morning. It is a pleasure to see all my colleagues. I see a lot of smiles in the House on both sides of the aisle. It is great to be back and it is great to be surrounded by so many familiar faces. It is great to see some new faces on this side of the aisle, and I want to welcome them to Parliament. Yes, they have been elected and now they are representing their constituents with distinction and a lot of energy. Like all members, I spent the summer meeting with Canadians, as we should all do, in Charlottetown, Edmonton, Toronto and obviously in my own riding of Saint-Maurice—Champlain, all of whom, like us, are trying to navigate a rapidly changing world. For those Canadians, I have good news, which is why it is an honour for me to participate in today’s debate on the very important bill, Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act. The measures set out in this bill will give Canadians the support they need right now. We are faced with a world that is increasingly complex, increasingly volatile and, for many, more costly and unpredictable. The United States is imposing new tariffs on Canada. Global conflict and ongoing supply disruptions in the Middle East have been driving up fuel prices around the world, adding pressure to household budgets here and in many jurisdictions. In response, Canada’s government remains focused on what we can control: building a stronger, more independent and more affordable country. Economic uncertainty and the rising cost of living mean that affordability is a major concern for families and businesses across Canada. One of our government’s priorities is to help Canadians keep more of their hard-earned money. While we are working tirelessly to make Canada stronger in the long term, we are giving Canadians a hand today to help them bridge the gap to this better and more certain future. Our government is diversifying our trade partners abroad, attracting historic levels of foreign direct investment, and I am sure everyone took notice of the great investment summit we had; delivering responsible fiscal management as every Canadian expects from this government; and supporting Canadians while under pressure from everyday expenses. There is no doubt that Bill C-38 is a key part of this effort. Bill C-38 is just the latest initiative by our government designed to help Canadians cope with elevated fuel costs. Members will recall that in April of this year, we introduced a temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax on gasoline, aviation gasoline, diesel fuel and aviation fuel. This measure reduced federal fuel excise tax rates to zero cents per litre. The positive effects were felt right away. When the suspension took effect, gas prices dropped by 11¢ per litre on day one. Again, that was 11¢ per litre on day one. Clearly, the savings were passed on to consumers right away. The suspension was set to end earlier this month, after September 7, but before that date, our government announced that it would be extending the suspension of the federal excise tax on fuel until January 31, 2027, and then reducing the regular rates by 50% through March 31, 2027. The passage of Bill C-38 would ensure that Canadians get this much-needed relief at the pump right now. This would be immediate, targeted and felt across our nation. This measure has already brought down everyday costs for Canadians, including those in trucking, in the food industry, in agriculture, in housing, in construction and in the delivery sectors. This provides Canadians with immediate, substantial support. The additional fiscal impact of extending the federal fuel excise tax suspension is estimated at approximately $2.9 billion. All told, Canadians are expected to receive an estimated $5.3 billion in tax relief in 2026 and 2027. We know that this measure will continue to make a difference for Canadians, and we also know that extending the fuel tax suspension is one of the measures helping families, workers and businesses cope with global economic uncertainty. Let me put this measure in context and talk about fiscal responsibility and economic strength, because Canada is entering this period of a new world economic order in a position of strength. Canada’s economy has remained resilient, despite global challenges. I want to take this opportunity in my first address to Parliament in this session as we come back to thank all the workers around this country. They have proven extremely resilient. I want to thank all the business owners. I think they deserve a big round of applause, because they are the ones who make this country work every day. I want to thank the countless small and medium-sized businesses across our country, which have proven resilient. The world has seen that Canada is far more resilient than people expected. Despite the winds bringing tariffs and other uncertainty in the world, Canada has shown a degree of resiliency that is an inspiration to all of us and to the world. In fact, Canada’s economy is so resilient that our country is projected by the International Monetary Fund to have the second-fastest economic growth in the G7 this year and next. This is a testament to the resilience of our people, our workers and our businesses across the country. This performance has put us in a solid fiscal position. As highlighted in the spring economic update, we have reduced Canada’s projected deficit for 2025-26 by more than $11 billion relative to budget 2025. That fiscal firepower is allowing us to build a Canada that is both strong and fair. As government revenues have increased, we have redirected some of that growth toward measures to improve affordability and support Canadians at a time of need. These measures are having a real impact on the lives of Canadians across the country. As Canada continues to build a stronger, more resilient and more independent economy, our government is taking concrete steps to bring down costs now while investing in long-term prosperity. For example, we are going to double the capacity of Canada’s electricity grid to ensure a supply of clean, reliable, affordable energy produced right here at home. Our government has already accomplished much in helping bring down costs for Canadians. We have cut income taxes for 22 million Canadians by lowering the first marginal personal income tax rate from 15% to 14% as of July 1, 2025. In fact, it was the very first measure of this new government. This is providing tax relief of up to $420 a year per person or up to $840 a year for two-income families. We have eliminated the goods and services tax for first-time homebuyers on new homes worth up to $1 million and reduced the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million. This relief has allowed more Canadians, particularly young families, to achieve their dream of home ownership. We eliminated the federal consumer carbon price as of April 1, 2025, directly saving Canadians money at the pump. On that same day, our government also removed the requirement for the provinces and territories to have a consumer-facing carbon price. To deliver additional support for more than 12 million Canadians, we also launched the new Canada groceries and essential benefit, a flagship measure that is immediate, targeted and meaningful for families across our country. It provides a family up to $1,890 this year and about $1,400 a year for the next four years and provides a single person up to $950 this year and about $700 a year for the next four years. This is meaningful, and it is going to help Canadians across our nation, but there is much more. We made the national school food program permanent, which is something every member of the House should be proud of. This is a game-changer for so many kids in our country and so many families. We just have to talk school teachers to know how much this is appreciated and is making a meaningful difference. It is going to provide school meals for up to 400,000 children per year. These are the kinds of things we were elected to do: to be there for children, to be there for families and to be there for Canadians. This is going to save participating families with two children in school an estimated $800 annually on groceries. This is really meaningful for many people. We also introduced automatic federal benefits, starting in the 2026 tax year, to ensure that up to five million low-income Canadians automatically receive the benefits they qualify for in the 2028 tax year. This is something that is very meaningful. It is the right thing to do to support Canadians. Canada is well positioned to respond to external pressures from the increasingly fragmented and uncertain world beyond our borders. We cannot control the global forces driving up prices, but we can control how we react to them. Our government is cutting taxes and boosting affordability to help Canadians manage everyday expenses, while building a more robust, more independent economy. Canadians see it, and they are behind this project to make Canada strong. It is not a coincidence that our government made this bill one of our first priorities of the new fall session. Canadians are expecting swift and concrete action from all of us, and when I say all of us, it is not not just those members sitting on this side of the aisle, but I am looking at my colleagues who are here this morning. They expect all of us to address the cost of living challenges, and today we are offering an opportunity for every member of the House not only to speak but also to take a step to support Canadian families. Canadians across the nation will be watching what people will do today, because it is sending a message that we stand with them. We are there for them, and that is the kind of message Canadians expect from the House. We are delivering for Canadians and expect all members of the House to do the same. The passage of this legislation would advance our government’s important work to bring down costs for Canadians today while building a stronger economy for generations to come. I urge all hon. members to pass Bill C-38 without delay. Let us seize the moment. Let us be ambitious. Let us be there for Canadians together.

John Brassard, Barrie South—Innisfil

Conservative
“Conservatives tried to cut the fuel tax three times to help families with costs. The Liberals voted against it every time and said our ideas were false. Now the government wants to cut the tax itself. I want the minister to explain why they changed their minds.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I have been here long enough, coming up to 11 years now, to remember the Liberals’ talking about the Conservative proposal of removing the excise tax on fuel. They accused Conservatives of spreading disinformation and said that it in fact would have a limited effect on affordability, yet here we are with the finance minister’s doing this today. The minister talked about swift and concrete action. Well, in April 2024, the Leader of the Opposition put forward an opposition motion to save families $670 by removing the tax on gas. Again, on April 15, 2026, the hon. member for Calgary East proposed another motion. Then, on May 27, 2026, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources proposed another motion to remove the tax on gas. In each and every case of those opposition motions, because Conservatives were ahead of the curve and saw the affordability crisis impacting Canadians at that time, it would have provided real relief, but instead the Liberals accused us of disinformation. In every case, the Liberals voted against it, including the Minister of Finance. Why has there been the change?

François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance and National Revenue

Liberal
“I want all members to vote for this bill. It will quickly lower the cost of gas and food across the country.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 45 of 100

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

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 36 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
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I have a lot of respect for my colleague. He is an esteemed and very experienced member of the House. I am trying to understand what he is saying to Canadians at home. I think what he is saying is that he is going to vote for the bill. I think that is good news, because it is something we should all support because it is meaningful, it is targeted and it is immediate. It is going to have an impact across our nation. It is going to reduce the pressure on the price of gas and the price of food. I take it that my hon. colleague will convince all his colleagues, because I know he is a man who has a lot of influence in his caucus. He will convince all those members to stand in unity with the government and do what is right for Canadians.

Elizabeth May, Saanich—Gulf Islands

Green
“I will vote for this bill, even though I have concerns about it. I also want the government to change the rules for our public pension fund. Right now, it invests more money in other countries than in Canada. I want that money invested here at home, in our own schools, hospitals, and small businesses.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the Minister of Finance will already know, because of the earlier negotiations between parties for unanimous consent on various aspects of the bill, that I will support it. I do have some misgivings, and I am glad for the opportunity to debate it later today. However, since the minister mentioned the investment summit, I will say that there is a piece of legislation I desperately want from the finance minister, which is to amend the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act. He will know that the investment board was set up in 1997 with only one rule: Invest Canadians’ pension money where it gets the greatest rate of return on investment, which means we are invested more outside Canada than in it, more in the United States than in Canada. I would like my pension dollars to go to the school down the road, to the hospital in my community, and to help for small business, not for Petco in the United States, not for Grok to build deepfake—

François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance and National Revenue

Liberal
“I thank the member for supporting this bill. On her concern about business investment, Canadian pension funds are putting large amounts of money back into our economy. I am happy to keep working with her.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her support. She has always been there to rise to the moment and support the government in a meaningful way. I want to thank her, not only on behalf of the government but also on behalf of Canadians, for the work she does and the position she has been taking in the House. I have had the privilege for almost 12 years now to see her in action, and she has always been there to support the government in a meaningful way. My hon. colleague’s point about the investment summit should reassure her. She will have seen that our pension funds in Canada have been recommitting very large investments into the Canadian economy. This is very much welcome. I am always glad to work with her.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“I support this bill. Our government already cut the carbon tax and gave millions of Canadians a tax break. Now this bill cuts the gas tax to help people with high costs.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I reflect on my constituents and what they want. We have a Prime Minister who has been leading a government that talks a great deal about building a stronger, healthier Canada, but that does not leave out the important issue of affordability. I think about one of the very first actions the new government took, which was to get rid of the carbon tax and then to provide a tax break to over 20 million Canadians. Today, the Minister of Finance has provided a true reflection of what every Liberal member of Parliament has been asking for: to provide additional tax relief in the form of the gas tax to address the issue of affordability, something I know he and my colleagues are very passionate about.

François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance and National Revenue

Liberal
“Canadians are worried about the cost of food, rent, and gas. This bill cuts fuel taxes to help them. It is part of our work to lower costs, along with cutting income taxes and giving tax relief on groceries and new homes.”
  • A repeated line

    “We are going to build Canada strong.”

    Said 33 times by 14 members since April 24.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I just want to compliment my colleague. He is a true voice for our government in the House. He is right. This is one of the measures. We understand that affordability is front and centre, and we have been acting on all fronts. Canadians are concerned about the end of the week and the end of the month, with the price of food, the price of rent and the price of gas. He is right that we have a suite of measures to help Canadians. We introduced the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. We cut income taxes for 22 million Canadians. We cancelled the consumer carbon tax, and we provided GST relief for first-time homebuyers. At every step of the way, we have been there to support Canadians. The message is very loud and clear that we are going to be there for them. We are going to build Canada strong. We are going to do that together. We should all be proud of what we can achieve in this country. We support each other. We build for the future. We are going to make Canada strong.

Brad Vis, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford

Conservative
“I support cutting fuel taxes, which happened because Conservatives pushed for it. Much of the oil helping government finances flows through my riding, where the 2021 flood hit. Will the minister promise to fund a new pump station to protect this farmland and the pipeline?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of Finance for agreeing to bring forward Bill C-38. Thanks to relentless pressure from the Conservatives, we have some taxation relief today. The finance minister outlined a series of other measures related to affordability. We should note in the House of Commons today that the government is doing better on its finances because of the high price of oil. Much of that oil actually flows through my riding; 37% of all oil from the Trans Mountain pipeline goes right through the Sumas Prairie where we had the big flood in 2021. That area is very vulnerable. In the MOU signed between the federal government and the Province of B.C. this summer, they committed to providing $20 million for funding the study, but there was no final commitment to put in the pump station to protect the most agriculturally significant lands in the province, the Trans Mountain pipeline and where they wanted to build a new pipeline. Would the finance minister be able to outline to the House whether the government will fund a new pump station to protect future investments in the Trans Mountain pipeline corridor, British Columbia’s most significant agricultural lands and—

François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance and National Revenue

Liberal
“I welcome the member's question. Canada is at the centre of global energy development. We will develop our resources responsibly, working with British Columbia and Indigenous nations.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Clarity 46 of 100

    Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, that is a very important question that my hon. colleague posed, and I thank him for raising the issue. It is great to hear an MP from British Columbia supporting the ambitious agenda we have set for ourselves. I will state the words of the executive director of the International Energy Agency, who recently said that the world energy architecture is being redesigned, and Canada is going to be at the centre. This is a project for all Canadians. With great attention to the comment he made, we want to make sure that we develop our resources in a sustainable and responsible way. The member can trust the government to always do that with all the partners, the Province of British Columbia and indigenous nations. We are going to do what is right for this country, and I welcome his question.

Gord Johns, Courtenay—Alberni

NDP
“People need help with costs right now, but this bill costs over $5 billion. Oil and gas companies are making record profits. I want to know how much profit these companies have to make before the government puts an extra tax on them, instead of putting this cost on everyday people.”
  • A repeated line

    “People are struggling to make ends meet.”

    Said 13 times by 10 members since April 27.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, New Democrats support relief for people right now. They are struggling to make ends meet. This bill alone would cost over $5 billion. I will remind the House that oil and gas companies are posting record profits. We have never had more profits than right now in the oil and gas sector. Conservatives in Britain have even brought in an excess profit tax, but we cannot get Liberals here in Canada to even consider it. I would ask the Minister of Finance the following. Is there a number? Is there a threshold? Is there an amount of profits? Is it $200 billion? Is it $300 billion? What is the number before the Liberals bring in an excess profit tax? This amounts to corporate welfare. That is exactly what is happening here. This bill should not be on the backs of everyday people.

François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance and National Revenue

Liberal
“I want the NDP to help us pass this bill quickly in committee. It will help families, truckers, and farmers afford fuel.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 46 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, first of all, the support from the New Democrats is welcome. I think they understand that the measure is a much-needed support for Canadians. This is about Canadians. This is about families, truckers and farmers. This is about the people who provide the logistics and feed this country. This is a measure that is very much needed. It is going to be impactful. I welcome the support, and I am sure the member is going to help us at committee to do that as quickly as possible to show that the NDP can stand up for Canadians.

Tamara Jansen, Cloverdale—Langley City

Conservative
“I am asking everyone here to let me share my speaking time with another member.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, before I begin, I seek unanimous consent to split my time with my colleague from Barrie South—Innisfil.

Tamara Jansen, Cloverdale—Langley City

Conservative
“I support lowering the fuel tax in this bill, but it is not enough. Small businesses and families are struggling with high costs, and a small, temporary gas tax break will not fix that. Big multinational companies get huge tax breaks, while regular people only get a few pennies of relief. We need permanent tax cuts and fewer rules on energy so people can keep more of their own money.”
  • Speech on a bill

    Signal 44 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
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I want to tell members about a man I will call David. David owns a little coffee shop on a main street that could be in almost any town in Canada. It is not fancy. There are a dozen small tables, a chalkboard menu behind the counter and a bell above the door that has probably rung a million times. He turns on the lights, ties on his apron and starts getting ready for the morning rush. He has been doing this for 20 years now, and he knows his customers well. He knows who wants an extra shot of espresso and which construction crew will go through that door just after six. David loves his business, but lately he has begun to dread opening the envelopes that arrive in the mail. The price of everything he buys has gone up under the Liberal government. The coffee beans cost more. The milk costs more. The cardboard cups cost more, and so does his insurance, his electricity and his rent. David cannot simply pass every increase along to his customer because he knows they are struggling too. He sees it in his customer who used to order breakfast and now just gets coffee, or the young mom who used to stop in three mornings a week and now comes once, so David absorbs what he can. Then there is the espresso machine. It has been sitting behind the counter for nearly 15 years. Every morning, David listens to it wheeze and rattle and hopes it makes it through another day. A new one would make the shop more efficient, use less power and let him serve customers faster. Maybe he could even expand his business a little. However, by the time David has paid his employees, his landlord, his suppliers and the government, the money he thought he might put toward a new machine is gone, so he calls the repairman again, replaces another part and tells himself, “Maybe next year.” Do members remember that young mom David used to see three mornings a week? Let us follow her home. She and her husband live only a few streets away. They are not poor. They both work. They have a modest house, two kids and two incomes, and 10 years ago they thought they were doing pretty well. They were the kind of family we used to call comfortably middle class, but lately, comfortable is not the word they would use. Their family car is 15 years old now. There is a warning light on the dashboard. The mechanic has told them that there is another big repair bill coming, and they know they really should replace it. Ten years ago, they probably would have. Today, they look at the price of a new car, look at the payment and decide the old car will have to last another winter. Let us now leave the family’s kitchen, and come with me to a very different room. Imagine a glass boardroom high above a city. Around the table are not mom and dad wondering whether the roof can survive another winter. There are executives, accountants, lawyers and investment advisers deciding where a multinational corporation should put its next billion dollars. Now Ottawa has put something new on that boardroom table: the mega deduction, a major new tax break designed to convince companies with capital, like, let us say, Brookfield, to invest here. Put those three rooms side by side. At the kitchen table, mom and dad have already gone through the bills twice. They need a new car and the roof needs work, but none of these qualify for this new Liberal mega deduction. What Ottawa offers them is Bill C-38, a few pennies per litre when they fill their gas tank. A few streets away, David may be able to use the mega deduction if he buys that new espresso machine, but first he has to find the money to buy it. After paying his employees, his suppliers, his rent and his taxes, there is not enough left. Let us face it. A deduction on something someone cannot afford is not too much help. His tax break is much the same as the family’s: a few pennies of relief when he gases up. Then there is the third room, where the numbers have a lot more zeros. Here is a corporation headquartered in New York with the capital to make enormous investments and a team of accountants who can calculate exactly how much a new tax deduction changes the return. Lucky for them, their former board member is now the Prime Minister of Canada. For that room, Ottawa is proposing a massive tax advantage, and this is where I think something has gone badly wrong. Do not get me wrong. Lower taxes have always been a Conservative principle. I want businesses investing in Canada, expanding here and creating good jobs, but lower taxes should not be a privilege reserved for the people with enough money and the right high-powered friends to be able to take advantage of them. If lower taxes help a multinational invest and grow, why would we not want that same breathing room for David? Why would we not want it for the families sitting around the kitchen table? They have spent years watching more of their paycheques disappear into taxes, while the cost of housing, food and fuel has climbed. Small businesses have faced the same rising costs, along with layer after layer of taxes, paperwork and government rules. Now, after making it harder and harder for them to get ahead, governments arrive with a few pennies of temporary relief on their gas and expect them to be grateful. Canadians deserve better than that. David does not need Ottawa to run his coffee shop or a government program to tell him that a new espresso machine would make his business more productive. He already knows that. He needs enough money left at the end of the month to buy it. That family does not need Ottawa deciding where its money would be most productive either. Mom and dad already know exactly where their next $100 needs to go. That is their decision because it is their money. Yes, let us give them the fuel tax relief in Bill C-38, but let us not call a few months of relief a solution. Conservatives have been pushing for relief at the pumps for a long time, years in fact, so we are glad the Liberals have finally discovered that lower taxes can actually help people. However, this is what happens when a Liberal government tries to borrow a Conservative idea without understanding the principle behind it. Canadians do not need a temporary break from high prices. They need policies that actually bring prices down. Gas prices have skyrocketed, and while Canada sits on some of the largest energy resources in the world, years of taxes, regulations and barriers to developing those resources have left us more vulnerable when global energy prices rise. This is a trap the Liberals created themselves. Relief means lower taxes, affordable energy and developing the resources Canadians already own. Let us stop piling costs onto the people who produce, work, hire and raise families in this country. Let us stop piling costs onto the people who are working to raise their families in this country. Let us stop treating small business like an endless source of tax revenue and paperwork. Let us stop taking from Canadians only to decide in Ottawa which multinational will get it back. Instead, let us remove the barriers that have been squeezing the middle class and small business, and then give Canadians room to do what they have always done. Here is what Ottawa seems to be missing: We would not have to wait 10 years for some foreign company’s investment to trickle down to the rest of us. Small and medium-sized businesses employ nearly two-thirds of Canada’s private sector workers. If thousands of businesses like David’s had a little more room to breathe, the effect would begin on main street across this country almost immediately. David does not need 10 years to decide what to do with another few thousand dollars left in his business. He already knows. He fixes the machine, buys equipment, gives an employee another shift or finally hires a person he has needed for months. Maybe mom starts stopping at David’s coffee shop three mornings a week again. Her five dollars goes into David’s till. David pays his employee. His employee buys lunch down the street. A roofer gets the family’s business. The mechanic gets paid. People begin making plans again instead of putting them off for another year. Nobody in Ottawa had to decide where those dollars should go. Ordinary Canadians did that themselves. That is what prosperity looks like: Canadians keeping more of what they earn, making their own choices, building their businesses, looking after their families and creating a better life for the people they love. That is what a real Conservative government would fight for.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“This bill helps Canadians with the cost of living, and I am glad the Conservatives will vote for it. Our school food program also helps 400,000 children. Should the Conservatives change their minds and support that program too?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, Bill C-38 is all about giving a break on the issue of affordability to Canadians. This is something the government has recognized as very important. One of the aspects the government brought forward last year to help children was the national food program within our schools, helping 400,000 young people. I am glad the Conservative Party today is going to be supporting Bill C-38. I am wondering if the member could provide her thoughts on whether she believes the Conservative Party should reverse its position and support Canada’s national food program, which supports 400,000 children from coast to coast to coast.

Tamara Jansen, Cloverdale—Langley City

Conservative
“I support cutting fuel taxes, but this bill does not go far enough. It starts bringing the tax back in February. People and businesses will still struggle with high costs then. We want the tax break to last until Canada Day.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 46 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, we support giving Canadians relief from federal fuel taxes. The question is whether the government is even going far enough. Bill C-38 would keep the excise tax at zero only until January 31. It would then bring back half the tax in February and March, before the regular rates return in April. Canadians’ affordability challenges do not suddenly disappear in February. Families will still need to drive to work. Businesses will still need to move goods. Farmers and producers will still face fuel costs. That is why Conservatives have called for fuel tax relief to continue through Canada Day as part of a broader action to lower costs.

Carol Anstey, Long Range Mountains

Conservative
“A farmer in my area is paying $2.43 a litre for farm fuel and cannot afford these rising costs much longer. Does the member think this bill will truly help farmers with these high fuel costs?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I think it is really important that in the House, we tell the stories of Canadians who are struggling. While I was sitting here, I actually got a message from a local farmer in my riding who said to me that they are paying $2.43 a litre for farm diesel. They wonder how much higher these costs can go before they can no longer afford to produce anymore. I am wondering if the member is hearing similar types of stories. Does she believe that this meaningfully addresses the concern that we often get from farmers of increased input costs that are making their businesses completely unsustainable?

Tamara Jansen, Cloverdale—Langley City

Conservative
“I want the House to pass this bill to keep pausing the fuel tax. Farmers, truckers, and businesses need fuel to make and move goods. When fuel costs go up, everything costs more for regular people. Extending this tax relief will keep costs down during a hard economic time.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I cannot begin to tell members how many times in the last couple of weeks I have heard about the cost of diesel. Fuel costs affect much more than what a family pays when they fill up their vehicle. Fuel is an input into producing and transporting goods across the country, which we hear everywhere. Farmers need it to operate equipment. Truckers need it to move products. Businesses need it throughout their supply chains. When those costs increase, they do not simply disappear. They place additional pressures on producers, businesses and ultimately consumers. Extending relief means continuing to lower one of those costs during a period when Canadians and Canadian businesses are already dealing with significant economic uncertainty. The objective should be to keep costs down rather than to begin putting them back up again.

Tamara Kronis, Nanaimo—Ladysmith

Conservative
“Tariff relief programs offer almost no help to small businesses making under $1 million, like local coffee shops. I want my colleague to tell us more about how this hurts businesses in her community.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I especially appreciate the focus that my colleague provided on small businesses. One of the things we have seen with the tariff relief is that for most of the programs, almost nothing is available to businesses under $1 million, like the coffee shop that she was discussing. I am wondering if my colleague could elaborate on that and talk about how that is playing out in her community.

Tamara Jansen, Cloverdale—Langley City

Conservative
“I want the House to pass this fuel tax cut. Local businesses are struggling to stay open. This bill is part of our plan to lower costs for families and employers, which will bring more jobs and growth.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am hearing that everywhere I go. We had a large picnic on the weekend before we came back, and everybody was talking about the fact that this is making it very difficult for businesses to continue. Fuel tax relief is only one part of a broader economic approach. The Conservatives’ economic action plan has called for gas tax relief to continue through Canada Day, faster approval of projects awaiting federal permits, removing the GST from Canadian-made automobiles, eliminating the capital gains tax on reinvestment in Canada and reducing other barriers facing Canadian investment. The principle connecting these measures is straightforward: lower the costs facing families and employers and create better conditions for investment, employment and growth.

John Brassard, Barrie South—Innisfil

Conservative

Linked statement

“I support this bill to cut the fuel tax, but it does not go far enough. High gas taxes make groceries and everyday life cost more for struggling families. Conservatives tried to cut these taxes three times before, and the Liberals voted against it every time. Now the government is finally copying our idea. This tax cut should last longer, at least until Canada Day in 2027.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am thrilled to be standing here today to talk about this bill, which would continue the lowering of the excise tax on fuel until January. Over the summer, I listened to my constituents and many of the business owners who have had to deal with the unjustified tariff war that is going on right now, which was started by the American administration. This type of relief and the continuation of this type of relief are welcomed. It was Ann Landers, the famous columnist, who once said, “People of integrity expect to be believed,” and when they are not, “time [will] prove them right.” The finance minister’s introduction of this bill has proven that Conservatives have acted with integrity on this issue and have worked hard for many years to save people money. We see this as a welcome temporary relief that perhaps does not go far enough, but who can argue against saving people money? Certainly, the Conservatives have been arguing this for years. Much of what Canada is facing, our citizens are facing and our businesses are facing, if we are honest about it, has been a self-inflicted wound of failed economic policies, policies that have not improved the lives of Canadians and have not saved them money. In fact, it has cost them a tremendous amount of money over the years, especially over the last 11 years, and we are seeing that continue. A lot of these failed policies were implemented long before Donald Trump became the President of the United States. It is Canadian businesses, Canadian families and Canadian workers in all sectors, like the energy sector and the interprovincial sectors, who are paying the price. What we have seen over these years is Canadians walk into the grocery store, especially seniors and single moms, who are those who can least afford it, look at the prices and, sadly, have to put many items back on the shelf. We are seeing a nutrition problem, and a food security problem, that is rampant in this country. I know that because many of the calls that I take in my constituency office are literally about walking people back from the ledge because they cannot afford their rent, their groceries and the necessities of life. For many years, Conservatives have been arguing for the removal of the excise fuel tax, the carbon tax and other taxes, because there is a cascading effect across the supply chain that impacts the prices in stores. When the producers, the wholesalers and the transporters have to pay this type of tax, it has an impact on people. It is only now, after 11 years, that the Liberal government is starting to understand what we understood years ago, which is that many of these failed economic policies, including these policies of increased taxation, are having that kind of effect on people. I stand here today in support of this legislation, but I also remind the House, and I remind you, Madam Speaker, as I know you are aware of this, that there have been several occasions when Conservatives have proposed reducing the tax on fuel, whether it is the excise fuel tax, the industrial fuel tax or other taxes. Each time we proposed those through opposition day motions, every single member of the Liberal government voted against it. Every member on that side voted against. There have been three occasions. This started in 2024 when the Leader of the Opposition proposed that we remove fuel taxes to save people money. At that time, the Conservatives were well ahead of the curve. We were not listening to polls. We were listening to our constituents about the impact that gas taxes were having on them, not just on the price they were paying at the pumps, but also on the price they were paying at the grocery stores and the price they were paying on all goods across the economy.At that time, in 2024, we proposed removing the tax on gas. The Leader of the Opposition did that. What did the Liberals do? They voted against it. Then, when Parliament resumed on April 15, 2026, the member for Calgary East proposed a motion, which states: That... (i) gas prices have soared upwards, (ii) Canadians now pay almost 20 per cent more at the pumps than Americans due to high Liberal taxes, the House call on the government to adopt the Conservative plan to save Canadians 25 cents-a-litre by removing federal taxes on gas and diesel— Diesel is in a whole other stratosphere with respect to pricing and how it is impacting producers, especially our farming communities. I will continue with the motion from back then in April: (a) removing the Fuel Excise Tax for the remainder of 2026, which costs Canadians 10 cents-a-litre; Every single Liberal voted against that motion. In fact, if I recall the debate back then, the Liberals who were standing up that day were accusing the Conservatives of spreading misinformation, of lying to Canadians about the savings they would have on removing the excise fuel tax, yet here we are today with government legislation that is proposing exactly what we proposed years ago, which could have started saving Canadians money. Then, on May 27, 2026, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources in Quebec talked about 13% higher gas prices in Canada than the United States, which equates to 22¢ more on average per litre. Again, every single Liberal member voted against that. People of integrity expect to be believed. When they are not, time will prove them right, and time is proving the Conservatives right on this and many issues, including the carbon tax and any other pieces of legislation that were Conservative ideas that the government is now implementing. I subscribe to the politics that, if it is a good idea, it does not matter whether it is a Liberal idea, a Conservative idea, an NDP idea or a Green idea. If it is a good idea that benefits Canadians, Canadian families and Canadian businesses, then it should be supported. Every single one of those opposition motions that we put forward was a good idea to save Canadian families and Canadian businesses money, but in every circumstance, the Liberals voted against it. All of a sudden, here we are today, and it is a good idea. We have a constitutional obligation as an opposition to question the government. Our constitutional obligation is to hold the government to account. It is to call into question decisions that are being made, legislation, regulatory reform or any other thing that it proposes. That is our constitutional obligation, and we uphold that obligation with great respect and great integrity. It is also our obligation to propose solutions to the government when things are not working, when things are failing with respect to legislation, regulation or other policies. That is precisely what we did. I know the government House leader, yesterday, stood up and accused Conservatives of proposing things that were un-Canadian. The government would rather have an audience than an opposition. These were good ideas that were being proposed years ago, and we will continue to propose ideas that are going to help Canadians. Let me end with something I received from a constituent. As the House knows, we have the ability to communicate all the time through various means, including sending out mailers. I got this one over the summer. Chris from Innisfil said, “The gas tax needs to be much lower”, which would improve affordability and automatically lower prices. Today, as I stand here, I say to Chris that I am sorry that we could not have done this earlier. We tried, as an opposition, to make life more affordable and to save him money. On this day, we will do that. We are going to support the government on this. It does not go far enough. We believe that it should extend at least to Canada Day in 2027, because the economic crisis, the food insecurity crisis and the affordability crisis that families are facing are real and are going to continue under the Liberal government.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 141

  1. Government Orders Canadian Fuel Affordability Act 92 statements
  2. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  3. Government Orders Canadian Fuel Affordability Act 10 statements
  4. Oral Questions Government Priorities 6 statements
  5. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  6. Oral Questions Forestry Industry 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions Housing 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions Housing 4 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  12. Oral Questions Public Safety 4 statements
  13. Oral Questions Justice 4 statements
  14. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  15. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Justice 4 statements
  17. Oral Questions Taxation 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  19. Oral Questions Labour 6 statements
  20. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Canadian Fuel Affordability Act 65 statements
  22. Oral Questions Justice 2 statements
  23. Private Members' Business Jury Duty Appreciation Week Act 6 statements
  24. Government Orders Canadian Fuel Affordability Act 182 statements
  25. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  26. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements