“I will vote for this bill because it lowers fuel taxes for people in northern Ontario, where everyone has to drive. But it is only temporary relief. I want the government to cut fuel taxes longer, scrap the industrial carbon tax and fuel rules, and give drivers permanent tax cuts.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act. I will be supporting this bill because whenever there is an opportunity to make life more affordable for Canadians, especially for the people of Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, I will support it. However, let me be clear: While the bill is a step in the right direction, it would not go far enough to address the affordability challenges facing northern Ontarians. Before I had the privilege of serving my constituents in Parliament, I owned and operated a small wholesale petroleum business. For more than 25 years, we supplied petroleum products to retail, commercial, industrial and residential customers throughout northern Ontario. Fuel costs were a significant expense, representing more than 30% of operating costs. Any increase in fuel pricing had an immediate impact. What affected my business then affects families and businesses across northern Ontario even more today. People in my region drive because they have to. They drive to work. They drive to school. They drive to medical appointments. They drive drive in order to buy groceries and to visit family. Unlike residents of major urban centres such as Toronto or Ottawa, northern Ontarians do not have the option of taking public transit to get around. That is why any measure that lowers the cost of fuel is something I support. However, make no mistake: This bill is before us today because Conservatives forced the government’s hand. For years, Conservatives have argued that taxes on fuel and energy are too high. We warned that rising fuel costs were driving up the price of groceries, increasing home heating costs, raising transportation expenses and making life less affordable for working Canadians. We brought forward motions. We raised these concerns in the House. We stood up for Canadians struggling with the cost of living. Eventually the government was forced to respond, but it did so only with temporary measures. First, the government suspended the excise tax on fuel. Then, after continued pressure from Conservatives, it extended that suspension until January 31, 2027, reduced the tax rate by half for February and March and scheduled the full tax to return on April 1, 2027. While this relief is welcome, it remains just that: temporary. For people in northern Ontario filling a typical 50-litre tank, the full suspension would save more than five dollars per fill-up. That is a start. Every dollar matters when families are stretching their budget. The problem is that this relief would come with an expiry date. Come April 1, 2027, the full tax would return. Canadians will not suddenly become more affluent on February 1, 2027. Northern Ontarians will still need to get to work. Students will still need to get to school. Families will still need to attend medical appointments. Truckers will still need to move goods across the country. The government’s plan would not solve the problem. It would simply postpone it. The federal excise tax currently adds 10¢ per litre to gasoline and four cents per litre to diesel. Conservatives have consistently said this is too much. The government likes to point to temporary fuel tax relief as proof that it is helping Canadians at the pumps. Any relief is welcome, and I support measures that help families keep more of their hard-earned money, but there is a reality that the government rarely talks about. It is that when fuel prices go up, governments collect more HST because that tax is charged as a percentage of the price at the pump. In Ontario, drivers pay HST not only for the fuel itself, but also on the federal and provincial fuel taxes already built into the price. In other words, Canadians are paying tax on top of taxes. The higher fuel prices climb, the more tax revenue governments collect, so while motorists may receive a few cents per litre in temporary relief, governments can be bringing in even more through increased HST revenues. For people across northern Ontario, that matters. Driving is not a luxury. It is how people get to work and keep their businesses running. Northerners do not have the option of simply driving less. That is why affordability cannot be based on temporary measures and short-term announcements. Northern Ontarians need lasting relief that recognizes a simple reality, which is that in our part of the country, transportation is not optional and every extra cent at the pump comes out of a family budget or small business trying to make ends meet. The Conservative position is straightforward. It is to remove federal taxes on gasoline and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027 and permanently eliminate the clean fuel regulations and the industrial carbon tax. Together, those measures could reduce fuel costs by approximately 25¢ per litre. That is meaningful relief. We know what happens when fuel costs rise. Transportation costs rise, the cost of moving goods rises, the price of building materials goes up, small businesses face higher operating expenses and, ultimately, those costs are passed on to consumers. At every stage of the economy, higher fuel costs make life more expensive. Meanwhile, diesel prices in the United States remain significantly lower than they are in Canada, placing Canadian producers, businesses and supply chains at a competitive disadvantage. The government cannot control global energy markets or geopolitical events, but it can control the taxes and regulations imposed on Canadians here at home. Conservatives proposed a plan that would reduce federal taxes on fuel until Canada Day 2027, permanently eliminate the industrial carbon tax and repeal the clean fuel regulations affecting diesel production. We have also called for increased domestic refining capacity and expanded fuel storage reserves so that Canada is better prepared when global disruptions cause prices to hike. Bill C-38 is better than nothing. I have always said that Conservatives will support measures that put money back into the pockets of northern Ontarians, but temporary tax relief with a sunset clause is not a long-term affordability strategy. Affordable energy should be a permanent priority, not a temporary political adjustment. Northern Ontarians are not asking for more government programs. They are asking to keep more of their own money. They are asking for lower taxes and a government that understands the realities of life in rural and northern Canada. Conservatives will support Bill C-38 and the relief it provides, but we will also continue fighting for a broader solution: the permanent removal of the industrial carbon tax, the elimination of the clean fuel regulations and an energy policy that puts affordability first. I will continue fighting for lower taxes for the people of Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt and Conservatives will continue fighting for lower taxes for all Canadians.”

“Fuel costs are too high, especially in rural and northern Ontario where everything is moved by truck. The government should extend the fuel tax break for longer. It will not cost the government any money because higher fuel prices already bring in more sales tax.”

“Madam Speaker, I think what I am trying to say is that the fuel costs are too high. Especially in rural and northern Ontario, where I come from, transportation costs and diesel costs affect everything. Everything is transported by truck and so on. Whether we eliminate the excise tax for good or extend it for a longer period of time, when the prices are higher, the Government of Canada is collecting more GST from those revenues. It is not costing the government any money to extend that longer. It should be at least extended to what—”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  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 →

“Electric vehicles do not work well in cold winters where I live. We need to pause the fuel tax for even longer, and we need to find other ways to lower costs.”

“Madam Speaker, first of all, where I come from, EVs are not really practical. They do not have enough power for the winter months, when it gets cold. As for the excise tax, the fuel surcharge that is going on should be extended for a longer period of time. We should be looking at different ways of reducing costs.”

“Global events like wars raise the price of oil, but taxes make it cost even more. Cutting taxes helps buyers, and that is always a good thing.”

“Madam Speaker, it is true that global pressures, wars and so on are having an impact on the price of oil. However, prices are set on a certain base amount, and taxes are then added on top. The relief we can give to consumers by reducing taxes is always a good thing.”

“The member was not talking about the bill. He talked about growing food instead. If the government wants to help with that, it should fund the irrigation project at Lake Diefenbaker. It promised to pay for this project in several elections, but it has done nothing. I want a yes-or-no answer on whether the government will fund it.”

“Madam Speaker, the member spends a lot of time filling this chamber with hot air, talking about basically nothing. What he was talking about had nothing to do with the actual text of the bill dealing with fuel affordability, but I will bite. He was talking about growing more fresh produce in Canada. One way that could happened would be by creating the ability to have more greenhouses. I will talk about one particular area in Saskatchewan, right around Lake Diefenbaker. The government promised to fund the Lake Diefenbaker irrigation project, which is probably a $6-billion to $8-billion project. The provincial government of Saskatchewan has said it is one of the big focuses of our province, yet the government has done absolutely nothing. Adding the member for northern Saskatchewan to the Liberal caucus has done nothing to advance that project in Saskatchewan. Will this member sit here today and say that the government is going to do what it promised in multiple campaigns and failed to do? In fact, it is a legacy project for Ralph Goodale. Will the member stand up in the House and say that the government will follow up on its commitment to fund the Lake Diefenbaker project in Saskatchewan, yes or no?”

• Off topic
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Relevance 5 of 100

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

  See full analysis →
• Personal attack
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Respect 86 of 100

  This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “the member spends a lot of time filling this chamber with hot air, talking about basically nothing.”.

  See full analysis →

“Liberals used to say high gas prices and the carbon tax did not cause inflation, while Conservatives said the carbon tax had to go. Now Liberals admit high gas prices cause inflation, and they got rid of the carbon tax. I want to know if the Liberals will admit Conservatives were right all along.”

“Madam Speaker, it was not long ago that we were hearing Liberals say that high gas prices were not going to affect inflation. As a matter of fact, they were saying, in the last Parliament, that Canadians were better off with the carbon tax than without it while we were arguing against it, saying that the carbon tax had to be removed. Now we are seeing a complete about-face with the same Liberals saying the opposite, which is that gas prices are inflationary and that they have to be brought down, and the carbon tax is gone. I want to know this: Are the Liberals acknowledging, finally, that the Conservatives had it right all along?”

“The Canadian economy runs on diesel. Our diesel prices are higher than world prices, and the government could lower them to help Canadians. Why will the Liberals not do that?”

“Madam Speaker, it is very clear that the Canadian economy runs on diesel. Highway 1 runs through my riding. I suspect it is not terribly far away from the member’s riding. When I drive down Highway 1, it takes two hours each and every time I go to the airport to fly out to Ottawa. The majority of the traffic is semi-trucks, which run on diesel. The previous motion we had before the House would have cut the price down, because we are about 24¢ to 31¢ higher than the world price on diesel. There is more the government could do to provide relief to Canadians and lower that price even further. Why will the Liberals not do it?”

“I support this bill because it lowers federal fuel taxes. High diesel prices are hurting farmers and making food and goods more expensive. The government should pass this bill and cut fuel taxes even more.”

“Madam Speaker, it is always an honour and a privilege to rise on behalf of the great people of southwest and west central Saskatchewan. Before I begin, I will mention that I will be splitting my time with the member for Calgary Skyview. Back home in southwest and west central Saskatchewan, the harvest is, according to the Government of Saskatchewan data, about 97% to 98% complete, which basically means that people are looking to clean up the sloughs they had to leave because they are still a little too green or a few areas of their fields need to be cleaned up a bit later. By and large, the harvest is complete. I want to say thanks and send a big congratulations to all the farmers back home who have completed another harvest season. It is definitely not without its challenges. We have the diesel prices, which we we are dealing with today. We had a lovely three inches of rain in the middle of harvest that put people, in some cases as much as 10 days out of the field, having to wait for the fields to dry up so they can get back to harvesting again. We will never complain about getting rain, but that was certainly something we were not anticipating. Nevertheless, we will take rain whenever we can get it. I would give them another quick congratulations. When we look at the prairie economy, in Saskatchewan, in particular, but this would be true of Manitoba and of Alberta, the manufacturing capacity we have in Saskatchewan is largely based on agricultural manufacturing. I am from a farming community called Frontier. My parents farmed south of Frontier. We have two success stories in Frontier. The first one is Friggstad Manufacturing. Friggstad Manufacturing started off making air seeders, cultivators and various farm implements in Frontier. Olaf Friggstad was the visionary behind it. The Friggstad family, including Olaf and his brothers, some family members, his sons and his nephews, got into the family business and created a terrific company. It was eventually bought out by Flexi-Coil and relocated to Saskatoon. Then replacing that, there was a brief period of Talon Tools operating out of the plant, but then Honey Bee Manufacturing replaced it. Honey Bee Manufacturing, to this day, is still operating in Frontier. It has doubled the shop capacity it took over when it bought the plant location. It exports combine headers around the world and has done very well. There are many other successful farming operations that have become manufacturing products. Honey Bee started in a shop. The Honey brothers made a big tractor and created swathers and headers. They had the idea and started in their own shop before they moved to the plant in Frontier. When we look around the province, there are many great companies in existence. I think of companies like Schulte, Seed Hawk and Väderstad. In Swift Current, there is S3 as well, which is across multiple provinces. It even has some operations in the United States. It does very well. We have a very unique irrigation project in Saskatchewan. I mentioned Lake Diefenbaker in a question earlier. I want to talk about a smaller project. There is a water reservoir called Duncairn Dam. Out of that, they irrigate toward a little community called Rush Lake, a small town in Saskatchewan. They irrigate from Duncairn Dam. They built this a long time ago, long before we had sophisticated equipment. They are able to channel irrigation to get all the way down to Rush Lake from Duncairn. It is probably about 50 kilometres of channels to get all the way to Rush Lake from Duncairn. It is flood irrigation that happens there, and they produce at least 30,000 hay bales in a given year. There are people growing hay crops. There is a bit of grain and cereal crops in there as well. It is mostly used by ranchers to grow the hay that they need to get their crops off. The Rush Lake hay bales are definitely a local legend. Everybody knows about the Rush Lake hay flats, and that is what it is largely used for. My family has benefited from this in the past. My uncle Darcy and my grandpa Albert owned some plots in the Rush Lake hay flats. Everybody in the area knows about the Rush Lake hay bales and what that represents for the area. It is a success story of what modern prairie farming ingenuity actually entails. When we look at all of this, what is the common thread to Bill C-38, which we are debating here today? This is about the Canadian fuel affordability act, which would remove some of the federal tax on fuel. Diesel fuel, as I said earlier, drives the national economy, such as the machinery used to pull a Friggstad air seeder or cultivator, which I did on my farm growing up. I proudly drove our 9280 Case and pulled a Friggstad cultivator, and we had a Friggstad air drill. Our header for our combine was a Honey Bee header, so we supported the local economy that way, but the diesel fuel that powered this equipment was very important, and that is what this motion is about here today. I was talking to some of the producers in my area. Back in April, the price of diesel went from $1.38 to $1.95 for the farm bulk price in seven days. At the end of April, when farmers were planning to get their crops in the field, they were looking to purchase the fuel that they needed to get through seeding season, and the price went from $1.38 to $1.95. That is a direct hit to the bottom lines of our farmers, and that is a cost that farmers cannot pass on. Grain farmers cannot pass that cost on; they have to pay whatever the current price is. There is no relief for them. The only relief that does exist is that they can get an exemption on GST. They have to pay the GST up front, but they can get that back. That does not change the fact that they were paying $1.95 in April, right at the peak of seeding season in Saskatchewan. Let us fast-forward to September. From the middle of September to the end of September, the price for diesel was about $2.25 a litre. It kind of fluctuated from there down to about $1.90, right at the peak of harvest season. I was talking to some producers. One farmer I spoke to had used 100,000 litres of fuel to get through harvest. His combines, the tractors that he uses to pull the grain carts in the field, the semi-trucks that he uses to haul the grain from the field back to the bins or maybe to the elevator or to the local terminal all use diesel fuel. I look at $2.25 a litre in the middle of harvest; that is what our producers are having to deal with. I am talking to farmers who have had to basically budget a doubling in the price of fuel in order for them to operate their farms. When they are trying to forecast for next year, they are already looking at the price of fuel and understanding they are going to have to write an even higher number in there to get the crop in the ground in April and May this coming year. That is what our farmers are facing here today. That is why we had a motion. The government voted against it shamefully and defeated our opposition day motion that we had a few weeks ago, speaking to the diesel price. We are approximately 24¢ per litre higher than the United States on average and 31¢ per litre higher than the world average. That is what our farmers and our producers have to deal with and what they are faced with. It is not because of something extraordinary that is happening here. It is because of other federal taxes. I will applaud the government here today for this bill extending a bit of fuel tax relief to our farmers, producers and truckers, to make sure that they can have a little more cost certainty in getting things done. However, the government can go so much further. There is so much more that it can do, to provide that meaningful relief. We had that opposition day motion before the House. The government voted against it shamefully. It is ridiculous that its members would do that. Again, this is how it directly impacts the price of food: If I am going to the grocery store to buy groceries, the groceries do not just magically appear at the shelf. Everything gets to the grocery stores and everything gets to the clothing stores. Winter is coming up in Saskatchewan, so all the kids’ ski pants, jackets, toques, mitts and sports equipment get to the store. They were brought in on a truck that went down Highway 1, through my riding, to get to wherever they are going. Whether they came up from the States or came in from a port, they came in on a truck and were transported across this country. The fuel prices in Canada are skyrocketing, and there is still more that the government could do to provide that relief. The House could do those things that would actually help to bring down the cost of essentials for Canadians, whether it is food, fuel, fertilizer or kids’ winter clothes that they need to be able to get through the winter or the sports equipment that they need to be able to have a little bit of fun. Also, lots of parents drive diesel-powered vehicles, SUVs or trucks. That extra 24¢ to 31¢ a litre is impacting the ability of Canadians to just enjoy a few nice little things like playing hockey or playing volleyball.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “Farmers cannot pass that cost on.”

  Said 3 times by 2 members since September 22.

  Every time it was said →

“Gas in Canada costs 24 cents more per litre than in the United States and 31 cents more than the world average. Government policies like carbon taxes and fuel rules cause these high prices. The government needs to do more to lower fuel costs for Canadians.”

“Madam Speaker, if the member had truly paid attention to my speech, he would know that I said, and this was written in our previous motion, that it is 24¢ per litre higher than the United States, across the border, and 31¢ higher than the world average. The war, absolutely, has something to do with the cost of what Canadians are paying at the pump, but 31¢ a litre higher than the global average is ridiculous. That shows that there is something happening here in Canada. It is things like the industrial carbon tax. This member talked about repealing the consumer carbon tax, which people paid at the pumps and was added on to all kinds of products that people could not see. It was baked into what they paid for food and things like that. There is more that the Liberals could do. They have hidden it. They have also added the Liberal fuel standards, which are driving up the cost of diesel and driving up the cost of production in this country. Those are things that the government controls. These are things that the government could repeal. It is not going to do it. The government even has a new Liberal member from Saskatchewan and all that he has managed to deliver in his time in office is scurvy to the people in northern Saskatchewan, which is absolutely ridiculous. The current government could do more to provide relief for Canadians. I expect it to do more, and so do Canadians.”

“Diesel prices went up by 15% recently, showing our economy has serious problems. Cutting the fuel tax helps, but the Liberals keep offering temporary fixes instead of solving real issues.”

“Madam Speaker, I was listening to my colleague from Saskatchewan give a speech about temporary reduction of the fuel excise tax. Some of the issues that he raised show us that there are fundamental problems to Canada’s economy. What we are hearing from these Liberals time and time again are temporary, short-term, band-aid solutions to what are really fundamental problems. This bill would reduce the fuel tax by 10¢. My colleague just talked about diesel prices going up 15% or more in a very short period of time. I know we are in the same party and he is probably going to think the same way I do. Is he not getting a little tired of the Liberals talking about temporary, band-aid solutions when there are fundamental problems that need to be addressed?”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 31 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 support this bill because it gives Canadians short-term relief from high fuel costs. But it is only a quick fix. The government collects far more money in taxes now than it did in 2020, yet life has only gotten more expensive. We need bigger, lasting changes to fix that.”

“Madam Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. Every single time that we get up in this House, it seems that we are addressing another Liberal failure. We passed Bill C-5 quickly because the government wanted us to help it pass quickly. That was a bill to help the government get around previous bad Liberal laws. However, that was not enough. The Liberals need Bill C-39 now. Bill C-5 did not do enough, so they created Bill C-39. Now, this House is actually dealing with Bill C-39 as well to deal with other systemic Liberal failures. Bill C-38 would provide temporary relief for Canadians. It would be a short-term, welcome measure, but there is more structural, substantive relief that the government could provide to Canadians. The Liberals have increased government revenue, from 2020 to now, from about $380 billion to over $500 billion. Ask any Canadian what they have gotten for that massive increase in government revenue from these guys: nothing. They have gotten higher prices. Everything is more expensive in Canada since 2020, thanks to these guys. The Liberals are hauling in way more money, and yet they are delivering nothing for Canadians. It is shameful.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 24 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“This bill does not do enough to help Canadians. Pausing the fuel tax for only a few months just delays higher costs for drivers, truckers, and farmers. I want the government to change this bill to cut fuel taxes until at least Canada Day 2027, remove the GST on fuel, and permanently cancel the industrial carbon tax.”

“Madam Speaker, let me begin by acknowledging the obvious: Suspending the federal fuel excise tax for a few more months will provide some relief, but this bill fails to provide any real long-term solutions for Canadians and the challenges they face today. Conservatives have been pushing this for a long time, but once again, we see the Liberal government take our idea, then fail to properly execute it. Bill C-38 would extend the temporary suspension only until January 31, 2027, meaning Canadians would eventually face the return of the full tax. The government is presenting a temporary pause followed by a scheduled tax increase and calling it an affordability plan. That is not a plan. It is just delaying what comes next, just like all the inflation they caused. Canadians are still skipping meals because of it. Fuel is not a luxury in Canada. Our country is massive and our cities continue to expand, meaning many residents must travel a considerable distance between their homes and workplaces. Transit is not an option for every shift worker, tradesperson, health care worker or parent. Many families need two vehicles simply to manage work, school, appointments and their children’s activities. When the government taxes fuel, it is increasing the cost of everything transported in this country. Groceries, building materials and medical supplies arrive by truck. The equipment used by contractors and energy workers runs on fuel. Higher transportation costs move through the supply chain until they appear on the receipt paid by the consumer. Canada’s truck drivers are essential to our economy. They transport our food, fuel, building materials, agricultural products and countless other goods that Canadians depend on every single day. Without truckers, grocery store shelves would empty, construction projects would stall and businesses across this country would struggle to operate. How can a trucking company plan its expenses, negotiate contracts, hire employees or invest in new equipment when the government provides no lasting certainty about fuel taxation? I have had the pleasure to meet with representatives of multiple trucking companies operating in my home of Calgary, such as Kuldip Sandhu from Syndicate Transport, Inderjit Sangha from Rig Logistics Inc. and Randhir Brar from New Way Trucking. Each of these companies employs over 400 truckers who do the vital service of delivering the food all Canadians need. We all rely on their hard work and it is time for the government to show them the appreciation they deserve with a real long-term tax break on diesel. We need it now. The trucking industry does not operate on a short-term schedule. Businesses make investments that last years. Owners take out loans, maintain expensive equipment, pay insurance premiums and compete for contracts in an increasingly challenging market. These are not expenses that disappear when a government tax holiday expires. I know for a fact that even large trucking companies are struggling to stay in business under these conditions and they are facing increasing operating costs. Let us think of the small owner-operators who are hard-working and are working long hours just to cover the cost of diesel, maintenance, insurance and financing. What does that leave them to take home to their families? Nothing. Owner-operators are vital to this industry, such as Harjinder Grewal, a hard-working Calgary father being punished by high diesel prices and who deserves real action to address this crisis. When diesel prices rise, the impact is immediate. When freight rates fail to keep pace with those expenses, the trucker is left absorbing the differences. When a trucker can no longer afford to operate, it is not just one business that suffers but also a family, a local employer and potentially an entire supply chain. Bill C-38 is nowhere near enough. The government wants Canadians to believe that extending the temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax is a meaningful solution to the affordability crisis. While any reductions in fuel costs are welcome and we support them, we must ask a simple question: What happens when the temporary relief ends? This is why Bill C-38 falls short. It treats fuel affordability as a temporary political inconvenience instead of as one part of the growing, broader cost of living crisis. People in Canada have endured rising mortgage payments, higher rents, expensive groceries and growing utility bills. If suspending the tax would help families in October, it would also help them in February. The timing of this would also cut out relief for some of the hardest-working Canadians: our farmers. The tax would go up right when they need diesel the most, for spring seeding and the hard work they will put in all summer to grow the food we desperately need. The government cannot argue that the tax is harmful enough to suspend now but harmless enough to restore a few months later. Conservatives would take a different approach. We would amend the legislation so relief would last longer and give Canadians meaningful certainty. Conservatives call for the government to remove all federal taxes on gas and diesel until Canada Day 2027 at the earliest. Doing this would save all Canadians up to 25¢ per litre. This may not sound like much, but it adds up. In the end, this would bring as much as $1,000 of savings for the average Canadian family. That amount of money can help feed many struggling families. The tax cut must also include the seven-cent-per-litre clean fuel regulations, the GST and a permanent cancellation of the industrial carbon tax, so Canadians are not forced to pay more for food and fuel. Bill C-38 would not fix any of these issues for the long term. Conservatives are criticizing the bill not because it would lower the tax but because the relief would be too limited and too short-lived. I call on the government to work with the opposition to improve this legislation, extend the relief, remove all scheduled tax increases, stop taxing tax through the GST on fuel, and give families and businesses a certainty that lasts beyond the next political deadline. If the government refuses, then it should at least be honest about what Bill C-38 is. It is not about fixing the affordability crisis facing Canadians. It is about giving the illusion of addressing the crisis.”

“Truckers deliver our food, but the government is making their work harder and more expensive. We want to cut the tax on diesel fuel for truckers and farmers until Canada Day. I want the government to work with us to do this.”

“Madam Speaker, do people know who delivers food? It is truckers. As I said in my speech, truckers are the lifeblood of our vast country, yet the government is making it harder for them to deliver the food we all need. Conservatives are fighting to give them a tax break on diesel until Canada Day, and we hope the government will work with us to give this break to Canadians, truckers, the whole trucking industry and farmers.”

“This gas tax cut is only temporary. It cuts about ten cents a litre for a few months, and then five cents. I want my colleague to explain if this gives Canadians any real, long-term help with high costs.”

“Madam Speaker, my colleague’s speech on the fuel excise tax temporary relief was very informative. That is the basis of my question: The relief would be just temporary. He should explain to Canadians once again that it would be temporary relief of roughly 10¢ a litre for a few more months, and then it would go down to five cents a litre. Do Canadians take any comfort from this that there is going to be long-term relief to the affordability crisis that is facing us today?”

“I support this temporary tax cut on fuel, but it does not go far enough. The government should also get rid of the carbon tax to lower diesel prices. Canadians pay 25 cents more per litre for diesel than Americans do. Cheaper diesel means cheaper food and goods for everyone.”

“Madam Speaker, it is common sense. Canadians are going through tough times. Even with this temporary relief, the government would not be giving them what Conservatives have asked for. For the long term, if the government gets rid of the carbon tax, then the diesel price could be pretty low. We are paying 25¢ per litre more than U.S. consumers are paying across the border for diesel. Everything depends on the price of diesel, because everything from groceries to construction goods has to be trucked or otherwise transported. If we can lower the cost of diesel, we can bring costs down.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  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 →

“We want to pause the fuel tax until July 1, 2027. The Liberals copied our idea to lower costs, but they did it poorly. Canadians need a break on fuel prices.”

“Madam Speaker, Conservatives are pretty clear that we want temporary relief until July 1, 2027, Canada Day. As I said in my speech, Conservatives are happy to see the Liberals steal more of our ideas on affordability, but we are disappointed to see that they are poorly implementing them. Our humble request is to please give Canadians a break so they can live their life.”

“I support this bill to keep fuel taxes low, but it does not go far enough. High fuel prices make food and everyday basics cost too much for families and small businesses. The government should pause fuel taxes and the GST on gas until at least July 2027, and pay for it by cutting government waste.”

“Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Calgary Heritage. It is an honour to rise in the House on behalf of the people of Calgary McKnight. Canada is facing serious challenges, both around the world and here at home. Our economy is under pressure, and our relationships with other countries are changing. Energy plays a big role in all of this. That is why today’s debate in the House is so important. Gasoline gets Canadians to work and their children to school. It gets seniors to medical appointments and tradespeople to their next job. Diesel powers the farm equipment that grows our food, and the trucks that bring it to our grocery stores. It moves lumber and concrete to construction sites so workers can build the homes we need. It fuels the buses that carry commuters across our cities. The price of fuel is more than just a number on a gas station sign. It affects the cost of the products we use every day. When fuel costs rise, Canadians feel it far beyond the pump. They feel it at the grocery checkout, when they buy their children’s school clothes and when they pick up everyday basics such as bread and milk. For too many families, the pressure of rising food prices has become a crisis. Nearly one in four Canadians, about 10 million people, now lives in a food-insecure household. Families are being forced to make difficult choices. One in five people has skipped meals or reduced portion sizes because of financial pressure, and nearly half have cut back on meat, dairy and fresh produce. Alarmingly, women, single-parent households and people with disabilities are among those most affected by rising food costs. Like me, many people in northeast Calgary came to Canada for the opportunity to build a better life. They came here to work hard, raise their family and start a small business, but after 11 years of Liberal policies, life has become harder and more expensive. Seniors on a fixed income are struggling to pay for food and fuel. Small businesses depend on fuel to receive supplies and serve their customers. Northeast Calgary is a major transportation hub, and truck drivers are spending more at the pump and taking less money home to their family. The Liberals should be making it easier for these people to earn a living, not planning to bring fuel taxes back. Higher fuel costs also affect the decisions small businesses make about their future. A trucking company that spends more on diesel has less money to replace an aging truck, maintain its equipment or hire another driver. A small business owner may delay expanding because there is simply not enough money left. Businesses cannot plan for growth when the Liberals keep adding to their costs. For years, Conservatives have warned that high taxes and unnecessary red tape drive investments out of our country. When a company takes its investment elsewhere, Canadian workers lose jobs and opportunities that investment could have created. We cannot afford to lose more. The government should be lowering costs so businesses can grow here, hire here and build their future here. Conservatives have long called on the Liberals to lower taxes and let Canadians keep more of what they earn. For years we demanded an end to the consumer carbon tax. After defending it at every turn, the Liberals finally removed it, but that still left other federal taxes and costs on fuel in place. These included the excise tax of 10¢ per litre on gasoline and four cents per litre on diesel, the GST, costs imposed by the clean fuel regulations, and the industrial carbon tax. Earlier this year, Conservatives renewed our call for fuel tax relief. We called on the Liberals to suspend the excise tax and the GST on gas and diesel for the rest of 2026, and to permanently scrap the clean fuel regulations and the industrial carbon tax. The Liberals adopted only part of our plan. They suspended the fuel excise tax, but only until Labour Day. Conservatives pressured the Liberals to extend that relief because families and businesses could not afford to see those costs return. Bill C-38 would extend the full suspension until January 31, 2027. Half the tax would return on February 1, followed by the full tax on April 1. I welcome a few more months of relief for Canadians, but what happens after January 31? Families will still need to drive to work. Truckers will still need to deliver goods. Small businesses will still need to serve their customers. Conservatives will support Bill C-38 because every dollar Canadians save matters, but we are calling on the Liberals to go further: extend the fuel excise tax suspension and remove the GST on gas and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027. We are also calling on the Liberals to permanently scrap the clean fuel regulations and the industrial carbon tax, to give families and businesses relief that lasts beyond the next few months. Our plan would keep the 10¢ excise tax off every litre of gasoline, remove eight cents in GST and eliminate seven cents in costs from the clean fuel regulations. That adds up to approximately 25¢ per litre, or $20 on an 80-litre fill-up. The Liberals have a responsibility to pay for this relief by putting their own spending in order. They cannot keep adding to the deficit and leaving further generations to pay the bill. Conservatives have called for reductions in wasteful spending on consultants, bureaucracy and programs that do not deliver value for taxpayers. Families across Canada are reviewing every expense to make ends meet. They deserve a government that is willing to examine its own expenses with the same care. Canadians need more than a few months of relief, and Conservatives will keep fighting until the Liberals adopt our full plan to lower fuel costs and leave more money in the pockets of Canadians.”

“Liberal spending and high taxes caused our affordability crisis and made life harder for Canadians. This temporary fuel tax cut is just a band-aid. The government needs to cut wasteful spending, lower taxes, and make a real long-term plan to help people afford life.”

“Madam Speaker, years of deficit spending and high taxes have added to inflation, driven investment away and made life harder for Canadians. Now the Liberals are offering a band-aid for an affordability crisis that their own policy helped create. They need to stop the bleeding by cutting wasteful spending and lowering the taxes they imposed on families and businesses. Canadians deserve a long-term plan for relief so that they can afford the basics and get ahead.”

• 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 →

“Canadians need relief from high gas prices, and cutting taxes is the best way to help. But the government's tax cut only lasts a few months. I want to know what Conservatives would do instead of using temporary fixes.”

“Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech on gas affordability, which is fundamental to our economy, as he indicated in his speech. However, this is temporary relief, lasting only until, I think, January of next year, just a few months from now. After that, it is going to go back up again. This is relief that Canadians need. What better way is there to give it than to reduce taxes? What comfort can we give to our constituents that this relief is not just going to disappear? I guess my question is, what would Conservatives do in place of what the Liberals are doing right now with their band-aid solutions?”

“Short-term tax breaks make it hard for businesses to plan ahead. I want fuel tax and GST relief to last until at least Canada Day 2027. I also want the government to permanently remove clean fuel rules and the industrial carbon tax.”

“Madam Speaker, businesses need to plan their deliveries and equipment purchases and hire well in advance. Repeated short-term extensions make those decisions harder when owners are already facing uncertain costs. Conservatives are calling for the excise tax and GST relief to be in place until at least Canada Day 2027, along with the permanent removal of the clean fuel regulations and the industrial carbon tax. That would provide a longer period of relief while removing other costs permanently.”