“I am a farmer, so I know high fuel prices hurt farmers trying to produce and deliver food. Cutting fuel taxes will help all Canadians. I want the member to see this and support the motion.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is not that I am recognizing diesel prices just today. I am a farmer myself. I come from a farming background. I understand how much it is costing me and other farmers across our nation currently to fuel our farms and make sure we can deliver food across this nation. It is not just for the measures that my hon. colleague is mentioning today but for all Canadians. I wish and desire that he would see what I am talking about and that the motion we are speaking to today would be spoken about as well.”

“This bill does not do enough to lower fuel prices. It only pauses one fuel tax for a short time, while leaving the GST, clean fuel rules, and the carbon tax in place. Gas prices, groceries, and shipping costs are way up, and small businesses and families in my province are struggling. I want the government to remove all federal taxes on gas and diesel until at least July 2027.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour and a pleasure to rise on behalf of the wonderful people of Long Range Mountains. I rise today to speak today to Bill C-38. Conservatives will always support measures that leave more money in the pockets of Canadians, but we should also be clear about how we got here. In April Conservatives brought forward a motion calling for federal taxes on gas and diesel to be removed to provide immediate relief to Canadians, but the Liberals voted against it. In May we came back to the House again and called for all federal taxes on gas and diesel to be removed for the remainder of the year, including the GST, and for the clean fuel standard to be permanently removed. That motion was also defeated by the Liberals. After months of Conservative pressure, the government has backed away from ending the excise tax suspension as originally planned, but it is important to note that this would still be only temporary. The tax is scheduled to start coming back early next year. Canadians need lasting relief from fuel costs, and the government’s own announcement on Bill C-38 acknowledges that lower fuel taxes benefit truckers and businesses involved in food, agriculture, housing, construction and delivery, because fuel costs do not stop at the pump. Statistics Canada reported just yesterday that gas prices are up 27.8% compared with a year ago, and increasing transportation costs are up 8.4%. For families who rely on their vehicles and for businesses that depend on fuel every day, those increases had immediate impacts. In September, inflation in Newfoundland and Labrador reached 4.7%, well above the national rate of 3.1%, and higher gas prices contributed to that increase in inflation. I want to talk about the real-life impacts of these extra costs. While in my riding, I spoke with Dwight. Dwight is a small business owner from Deer Lake. His operation employs 30 people. He runs his own company that provides waste management, construction, snow removal and trucking services. His entire operation relies on diesel. I spoke with him about the impacts of rising fuel costs on his business. In 2024, Dwight’s average diesel price was $1.81 a litre. In August 2026, the price was $2.41 a litre. Dwight outlined that the contracts he receives are five to seven years long, and the increase in fuel costs cannot be sustained in those conditions, as his input costs dramatically increase with no ability to recover those costs. In that type of business, with long-term contracts, he has to mitigate those extra costs. As a result, he delays purchases and postpones investments. He runs short-staffed as he tries to absorb these increased costs, which means fewer opportunities for growth and employment in our community. It is also important to understand that our small and medium-sized businesses keep our community initiatives and charitable organizations running. They are the heartbeat of our small communities, and when they are squeezed with rising costs, it ultimately impacts the entire community. More broadly, when it costs more to operate the fishing boat that brings in the catch, more to move groceries to the store, more to run construction equipment and more to deliver goods to communities across this vast country, those costs do not disappear. They make their way all the way through the supply chain, and eventually they show up in the prices families pay. In Newfoundland and Labrador, we understand this better than most, because we are a province of rural, remote and coastal communities. Goods have to travel long distances to reach us, and many people also travel significant distances for work, groceries, medical appointments and everyday necessities. For someone living on the Great Northern Peninsula or in another rural part of my beautiful province, fuel is an essential part of the cost of everyday life. For the people who grow our food, harvest our resources and keep our communities supplied, it is a cost they cannot avoid. Ian, a farmer from Cormack, wrote to my office about the financial pressures facing his business. He is averaging $60,000 to $70,000 per month in direct diesel fuel costs. He cannot sustain those increased input costs, and he cannot pass those costs on. That does not include the indirect costs of feed, fertilizer, other supplies and the transportation of his milk. These increased costs are not sustainable, and temporary relief is not sufficient. If lower fuel taxes provide relief, it does not make any sense to start taking that relief away while families, farmers and businesses are still struggling with the cost of everyday necessities. Families are still paying far more for groceries than they were a few years ago. Statistics Canada says that grocery prices are now 33% higher than they were in September 2020. I hear from seniors in my riding who are watching grocery prices and fuel costs and are wondering how much further their fixed income can stretch. I hear from young families who work, save and do everything they are supposed to but are still finding that the cost of transportation, food, housing, and everyday necessities keeps putting home ownership further out of reach. Small businesses are under the same pressure because they cannot absorb higher operating costs forever. Eventually, those costs mean smaller margins, less money to hire and invest, and higher prices for customers. That pressure is showing up in other ways, too. Food Banks Canada recorded more than 2.1 million visits in a single month last year, nearly double the level seen in 2019. Almost one in five food bank clients reported employment as their main source of income, meaning many people using food banks are working, but they still cannot afford the basics. There is also a job and investment side. Businesses need a clear view of what their costs will be before they decide whether they are going to hire, expand or make a major investment, or as in Dwight’s case, commit to long-term contracts and then face increased input costs that undermine the profitability of his business and jeopardize the livelihoods of his employees. When fuel costs remain high and federal tax policy keeps changing, those decisions become harder to make. Lower fuel costs over a longer period would give businesses more certainty, leave more money available to invest in their operations and help to protect Canadian jobs. Our Conservative proposal would remove all federal taxes on gas and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027 to save Canadians up to 25¢ per litre and bring as much as $1,000 in savings for the average Canadian family. This includes the 7¢ per litre clean fuel regulations, the GST and removing the federal industrial carbon tax so that Canadians are not forced to pay more for food and fuel. Bill C-38 does not address the full cost that federal policies add to fuel. The GST remains, the clean fuel regulations remain and the federal industrial carbon tax continues to add costs throughout the supply chain. A temporary suspension of one tax does not address all these costs. Canadians need relief that lasts longer than a few months and lowers the overall cost of fuel. There is also a broader question here about Canadian energy security. Canada is one of the largest energy-producing countries in the world, yet parts of our country remain dependent on imported refined petroleum products. This is important, because when global supply chains are disrupted, when shipping routes are threatened or when decisions made in another country can affect the price and availability of fuel here at home, Canada should not have to wait for the next international crisis before thinking seriously about its own fuel security. We should be producing, refining, storing and transporting more of the energy we need here at home. That means attracting private investment, getting infrastructure built and making sure Canada can compete for projects and investment with other countries. For Newfoundland and Labrador, this is an enormous opportunity. Our province has major energy resources, skilled workers, strong marine infrastructure and communities with generations of experience in resource development. Yet, for generations, too many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have had to leave home to find work elsewhere. For me, that is one of the most important parts of this debate. For a tradesperson in Newfoundland and Labrador, more investment can mean finding work close to home instead of spending weeks or months away from their family. For a young person, it can mean learning a trade or earning a degree and still being able to build a career in the community where they grew up. For local businesses, more investment and more jobs mean more customers and stronger communities. For Newfoundland and Labrador, investment certainty is very important. When companies decide where to invest, they look at their operating costs, the regulatory environment and whether a project has a reasonable chance of moving forward. If Canada is more expensive and less predictable than competing jurisdictions, investment goes elsewhere and workers are the ones who lose out on those opportunities. Temporary tax relief does not solve the bigger problem if Liberal policies continue to make it difficult to build the infrastructure needed to strengthen our own fuel supply. That means creating a more competitive environment for investment, getting projects approved faster and making it easier to build and transport in Canada. For Newfoundland and Labrador, that is where the real opportunity lies. Conservatives are calling for broader relief, and we will continue pushing for it by pushing to remove the remaining federal taxes and costs that make gas and diesel more expensive while also pushing to make Canada a better place to invest. Families in Newfoundland and Labrador do not need another announcement telling them relief is coming. They need to see the difference when they fill their vehicles, buy their groceries, heat their homes and pay their bills. That is what Conservatives will continue to fight for.”

“We are not playing games. We are speaking up for Canadians. The federal government can control parts of fuel prices and give people immediate relief right now. We need to do that.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is certainly welcome to visit my riding at any time. It is a beautiful riding. What is equally frustrating is when we speak up for Canadians and tell their stories, and then the Liberals tell us we are playing silly partisan games. I find that equally frustrating. There are many components of fuel prices that we can control and that the federal government can offer relief on, and that is exactly what we are talking about. We need to do the things we can do. There are things we can control that would have a direct impact on immediate relief on fuel prices for Canadians. In this current environment, that is extremely important.”

• 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 →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  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 →

“Fishers in Newfoundland and Labrador are already facing many problems, and high diesel prices are making their costs even worse. I want the member to explain how these fuel costs are hurting the fishers in her area.”

“Mr. Speaker, my friend and colleague’s fishers just off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador have been experiencing a lot of challenges lately, not the least of which is the snow crab quota aspirations of the French. Now, they are faced with higher diesel prices, which impact every fisher because those big fishing boats are powered by diesel. They are experiencing a significant increase in their costs as well. I would like the member to maybe extrapolate what that means for her fishers.”

“Fishing is very important to Newfoundland and Labrador. High fuel costs hurt fishers by cutting their profits. Because of these costs, they cannot buy new equipment, hire more workers, or grow their businesses.”

“Mr. Speaker, yes, the fishing industry is extremely important to Newfoundland and Labrador. The food fishery is another component of Newfoundland and Labrador that is extremely important. These are costs that are directly impacting these operations. Ultimately, that means that fishers cannot hire more people for their operations to expand the fishing industry. They cannot invest in new equipment. It has direct impacts, as it diminishes their profit margins. It also inhibits them from investing and growing their operations and providing more opportunities in a vital and extremely important part of our economy in Newfoundland and Labrador.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“More businesses are closing than opening in Canada. Liberal policies are hurting small businesses. Conservatives support this bill because it helps small businesses survive.”

“Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business recently produced a report that talked about the entrepreneurial drought in this country, with more businesses closing than opening. The results are that the Liberal policies are not supporting small and medium-sized businesses. That is not my opinion; that is just the reality. These are the measures that we as Conservatives believe support small and medium-sized businesses, and that is why we are advocating for them.”

• 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 →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 33 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 →

“Conservatives will vote for this bill because it gives Canadians some relief at the gas pump. But it does not do enough. It saves drivers about five dollars a tank, and it only cuts four cents a litre on diesel when prices are up 80%. High diesel prices make groceries and shipping cost more for everyone. The government should remove the GST from fuel, scrap the carbon taxes, and give real relief to truckers and farmers.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies. Before I begin my speech, I would like to recognize our parliamentary staff who are sitting here late into the evening, the clerks, the recorders, the Sergeant-at-Arms and the technicians, as well as the Parliamentary Protective Service. I want to thank them for putting in the extra time to make sure that Canadians can exercise their democracy in the House. I am honoured to speak to Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act. I would like to start where a lot of Canadians start their day, which is at the gas pump and the gas checkout. At the end of September, a litre of diesel across this country cost $2.60, according to Natural Resources Canada. In the weeks before that, diesel had peaked at about $2.75 a litre nationally, which is about 80% above the roughly $1.40 to $1.50 that Canadians were paying a year ago. That is an 80% increase in 12 months. Let me say this plainly. Conservatives will vote for this bill. Any measure that lets Canadians keep more of their own money at the pump, we will support. We supported it when it was proposed, and we support it today, but if the government expects a round of applause, I would remind the House how we got here. When the fuel excise tax was suspended in April, the pause was set to expire on Labour Day. That was the plan, to put taxes back on gas and diesel just as Canadians were heading into the fall with prices still soaring. It took months of pressure from this side of the House, the Leader of the Opposition, truckers, farmers and families before the government changed course. I am pleased it did, but Canadians should not have to drag relief out of Ottawa one reluctant extension at a time. Let me tell the House and the Canadians who are watching what this bill does. It extends the suspension of the federal fuel excise tax until January 31, 2027. It then cuts the regular rates in half until the end of March, with full rates returning on April 1. For the average driver, that means about five dollars saved on a typical 50-litre tank of gasoline. That is it. It is still something, but it is only five dollars per fill. Let us look at what we are up against here. Stats Canada reported yesterday that inflation rose to 3.1% in September, driven by gasoline prices that were up 27.8% from a year ago. Without gasoline inflation, it was about 2.2%. In other words, the cost of living crisis is not some mystery. One input is dragging the whole bucket up. Energy prices are up 19%, and fuel oil and other fuels are up 57.8%, which is how much more a family in Atlantic Canada will pay to stay warm this winter. Grocery prices are still up 33% from September of 2020. Families have not recovered from that. Now they are being asked to again absorb a fuel shock on top of it. Here is where the bill falls short. Gasoline is up about 28% from a year ago, and diesel is up 80%. The excise tax relief is 10¢ a litre on gasoline, but only four cents a litre on diesel. That is four cents against a price of $2.60, which is about a penny and a half on every dollar of fuel. For the farmers who produce our food, the people who move this country’s food, fuel and building materials, and the contractors who build our infrastructure and homes, four pennies a litre is a rounding error. The Liberals need to get serious. Consider the long-haul trucker. That is a real person driving an 18-wheeler. A long-haul truck holds about 1,000 litres of diesel fuel. Back in March, with prices well below where they are now, filling one in Toronto would cost roughly $2,300, and that was about a $700 increase from the prior year. At today’s prices, it is about $2,600, which equates to more than $1,000 per tank above last year. What does this bill save on that fill-up? It is about $40 on $2,600. It is only 40 bucks on 1,000 litres. It is still 40 bucks, but that is all it is. I want the House to hear the voices behind those numbers. One Ontario owner-operator told reporters his fuel costs have risen by about $1,000 per truck every month and that his credit cards are filling up. His trucks haul food to northern communities. A small business owner is putting the groceries for remote northern communities on his credit card while the government calls four cents a litre relief. Consider the Maritimes and the Atlantic provinces. Trucking associations say that 90% of the food, forestry products and manufactured goods used in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick move there by truck. There’s no other way to get them there. The pain is uneven. Last week, the average fuel price ran from $2.94 a litre to $2.47 a litre in Grande Prairie. Consider the farmer who is in the field right now. The Grain Growers of Canada calculated that a single combine running through a 30-day harvest costs an extra $15,120 in fuel. That is one machine. Farmers cannot pass that cost along because the market sets the price of their crop and the commodities that they produce. By my math, the excise relief on that same combine is worth about $670, roughly 4% of that added cost. It does not stop at the farm gate. Researchers at Dalhousie have modelled a half-point to seven-tenths of a point bump in grocery inflation if elevated diesel prices persist, not increase but persist. A tax on fuel is a tax on everything that moves by truck, which is everything on a grocery store shelf and everything in new homes. What would real relief look like? Conservatives have been clear. We would extend the full excise holiday until Canada Day 2027. We would remove the GST from fuel purchases. At current prices, the GST accounts for roughly 13¢ of every litre of diesel, a tax collected on top of a tax. The higher the price goes, the more Ottawa takes in. We would permanently scrap the industrial carbon tax and the clean fuel standard, which the Leader of the Opposition has called “carbon tax 2.0”. Conservatives calculate that, together, these measures would save Canadians up to 25¢ a litre, as much as $1,200 a year per families. That is what real relief looks like. That is a long way from the four cents a litre that the Liberal government is offering in the bill. Canadians deserve to know why this country, one of the greatest energy producers in the world, is paying so much to fill a diesel tank. The Leader of the Opposition has pointed out that Canadian diesel prices are about 32¢ a litre higher than in the United States, our neighbours to the south. Conservatives say that Canada produces enough diesel to meet national demand but transportation bottlenecks leave some regions dependent on U.S. imports. We should be using our own energy to power our own people. Canada should be refining and delivering its own fuel, not leaving truckers and farmers at the mercy of global pressures. Last week, we gave the House a chance to act. On October 7, Conservatives tabled a motion calling for an end to all federal taxes on diesel fuel until Canada Day. It was defeated. Only Conservatives voted in favour. The Liberals, the Bloc and the NDP all voted against. Canadians should remember that vote. When the people who produce and move our food ask for help, those parties in the House said no. As for what comes next, the Minister of Finance has said that whether relief continues past March will depend on global conflict, oil prices and the state of federal finances, without naming any price threshold or formula. Farmers cannot plan a planting season around waiting and seeing. Truckers and contractors cannot price a contract that way. Families cannot budget on hope. After a decade of Liberal government, Canadians are tired. They are tired of being told that tax relief is a gift from Ottawa rather than their own money being returned. They are tired of half measures and of relief that arrives late, shrinks on schedule and comes with no plan. Here is the Conservative plan. We will vote for the bill because of the current affordability crisis, as Canadians need every cent they can get, but we will keep fighting for the rest, for no GST on fuel, no industrial carbon tax, no clean fuel regulations and a Canada that produces and refines its own diesel. A tax on fuel is a tax on everything, and Canadians have already paid enough. To the truckers sleeping in cabs on the long road home, to the farmers in the combine long after sunset and to the parents doing math at the grocery store or gas station, we see them. They should be assured that Conservatives are fighting for their jobs. We are fighting for their families, and we are fighting for them.”

• Echo ×10

  A repeated line

  “Including the industrial carbon tax and the clean fuel standard.”

  Said 10 times by 9 members since April 28.

  Every time it was said →

“This bill only saves four cents a litre on diesel and ten cents on gasoline. That is not enough to help farmers, truckers, and contractors who cannot afford life right now. The Liberals voted against admitting there is an affordability crisis, yet now they are looking at a fuel affordability bill. That is hypocritical.”

“Mr. Speaker, the issue that we are looking at today is Bill C-38, which proposes four cents a litre on diesel fuel alone and 10¢ a litre on gasoline. Like I said before, four cents a litre on diesel fuel to farmers, truckers or contractors is a rounding error. The crisis that folks in manufacturing and transportation are facing is affordability. The Liberals today had an opportunity to recognize, through our motion, that for the past 11 years we have been governed here in Canada by a Liberal government, and that today, we are in an affordability crisis. The Liberals said no. All the other parties agreed that we are in an affordability crisis. They had the opportunity to say no, and I find it really hypocritical that today we are studying what is known as the Canadian fuel affordability act.”

• 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 →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 18 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I want the member to explain how higher fuel costs make farming too expensive. How does that raise the price of food for Canadians?”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member for Provencher, if he could, to further explain how some of those costs on the farms and at the farm gates are becoming almost insurmountable for some of those farmers who are working their hardest to put food on Canadian dinner plates, whether it be grains, beef or other products. How is this increased cost in fuel, which we are seeing impact things all the way down the line, impacting the actual cost on Canadian dinner plates from coast to coast to coast?”

“The price of diesel fuel almost doubled this past year. Farmers must absorb these higher costs because they cannot set the market prices for their crops. At the same time, truckers and food processors pass high fuel costs along to shoppers, which makes food more expensive. We should pass this bill to lower fuel taxes.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is true that farmers have to absorb the cost of increased diesel fuel prices, and they have increased almost 100%. In other words, for Canadians watching today, the price of diesel fuel has almost doubled in this last year, and farmers have no choice. They have to put diesel fuel into their combines, trucks and tractors, and they also have to then have that product shipped to the elevator and shipped to a rail yard before it can be sent to a processing facility, where it gets processed and manufactured into food products, which again get shipped with a transport truck across the highway, burning diesel fuel at $2.60 a litre. The food products finally get delivered to a warehouse, and from a warehouse, they will get picked up one more time by a semi-truck and delivered to a retailer for distribution or for sale to the public. All of those activities require the use of diesel fuel, and when diesel fuel has increased by almost 100% in the last year for the farmer, there is nothing he can do about it, because his prices for his products are commodity prices. They are market-based. However, for the transport companies and for the processors, the price of increased fuel and energy costs are actually being put onto the backs of consumers who are buying those products, because they are just moved along, and the farmers absorb it. Processors and truckers do their best to pass those costs along to the consumer, the end user.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“This bill lowers the fuel tax, but it does not do enough. The government caused this high cost of living by blocking energy projects for 11 years. I want all federal fuel taxes removed until at least Canada Day 2027.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise as the representative of Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies. As I have noted previously, it is a riding that stretches from the continental divide in Yoho National Park, through the lakes and highlands of the Shuswap, to the ranching grasslands of Kamloops. It is a total of roughly 450 kilometres of Trans-Canada Highway, from east to west, and an area where people rely on vehicles that can be on the road all day, and sometimes well into the night. I know this first-hand after having traversed this great riding from end to end for months, from before the time I was elected as a federal representative in April 2025 up to and including just a couple of days ago. Today, I rise to speak to Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act. We are here late tonight debating this bill. The bill proposes to reduce the federal excise tax on gas and diesel until January 31, 2027. I propose that we are here debating more than a reduction in the fuel excise tax, and that we are here debating the Liberal government’s record on affordability over its 11-year tenure in government. This is an affordability crisis created by 11 years of Liberal government. While Bill C-38 proposes to reduce and remove the fuel excise tax until January 31, it would be a small relief for some and would only go until January 31. Canadians need so much more relief. That is why Conservatives are calling for the removal of all federal taxes on fuel until at least Canada Day 2027, and Canadians need so much more. Canadians expect their government to govern in a manner that keeps the cost of living under control and provides the services needed to help keep their country safe and sustainable. We, as elected representatives, have a duty to those residents of this great country to deliver on their expectations. However, what Canadians are paying to live under the Liberals has grown beyond the means of many. Of course, the Liberals will try to blame this on all sorts of things, like Donald Trump, the trade tariffs, the war in Ukraine and other worldly events. When it comes down to it, however, it is Liberal policies over the last 11 years that have brought on this affordability crisis. If the Liberals had not blocked progress of resource development through bills like Bill C-48 and Bill C-69, and promoted an antidevelopment agenda, Canada could have been in a position where these worldly events mattered less and we would be more self-reliant on our own energy and resources. After 11 years, we are here with a government desperately trying to develop trade with other countries, lagging behind in the development, processing and sales of liquefied natural gas and other resources the rest of the world is looking for. We have had 11 years of the Liberal government kneecapping the potential wealth growth of this country. Tonight, we have a Liberal government trying to look like the saviour from its own policies and legislation. People should not be fooled into thinking this is a new government. Many of the same architects behind those debilitating policies are still at those same seats at the cabinet table, pushing the same ideologies and not wanting to admit they are the ones responsible for the growing deficits and debt service costs that Canadians of future generations will be forced to pay. Here we are debating this tax relief bill tonight, October 20, 2026, like it is the Liberal government’s idea. However, we have a government trying to fool people into believing it is sparing them from the high costs that it has caused. In April of this year, Conservatives brought forward a motion in this House calling for the federal fuel excise tax to be removed for the rest of 2026, along with broader relief from federal costs on gasoline and diesel. It is real relief that could have been in place already had the Liberals not voted against it. As I met with people at home in the beautiful riding of Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies over the summer months, and even more in recent weeks, one of the first topics of every discussion was almost always the cost of living and affordability for ordinary Canadians. When I visited food banks, I learned that some of them are seeing increases in reliant families and increases in demand ranging from 200% to 500%. The shelves that were once being stocked by volunteers are now seeing some of those same volunteers coming in for help with their grocery needs. When I talk to seniors having to decide between putting food on the table and getting a gift for a grandchild, or parents trying to stretch two family incomes to buy food and shelter for their family, or potential parents who are choosing not to have children because they do not think they can afford it, my heart aches for them. Life was not like that in Canada, not even during the global recession in the mid-2000s, and it does not need to be like that anymore. We have so much potential here in Canada, and I believe Canadians will see that potential and see that a Conservative government is what is needed to truly deal with the affordability crisis, a government that would unleash the potential of our greatest resources in this country. I do not just mean the natural resources in and on our lands and waters. I mean the people of this great country, who are willing and ready to build on the opportunity and resources we share. They can see the potential, and they know that the government has been holding back that potential. I see fuel costs at three dollars per litre for diesel at home as I drive down the highway from one end of my riding to the other. Truckers have to pay that fuel price just to get goods to grocery stores. Parents have to pay that price when they take their kids to a soccer game and even when they go to the grocery store. This has to change, and it has to be through measures that are more substantial than what the Liberals are putting forward as their idea of a saviour-type move. As I close off tonight, it is getting late here in Ottawa, near 11 p.m., and I know there are people back home who need to know that my Conservative colleagues and I will fight late into the night and beyond to bring affordability relief from the Liberal government’s ever-increasing cost of living. Those late-night watchers go beyond my wife and my family. They are the people across the Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies riding and across the country who are depending on us, the official opposition, to keep reckless government spending under control and to bring them real opportunity and affordability. I thank everyone watching for caring about our country and for contacting my colleagues and I about their affordability concerns. It is their words that matter most to us on this side of the House. We are here for them late into the night. I thank everyone for watching and listening and for their support. We are, after all, here for them.”

“The Liberal government has hurt Canadians for 11 years. Energy investments should have happened a decade ago, but the government held them back. Now, youth unemployment is at record highs, and young people cannot find work. The government is responsible for these problems.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would absolutely love to respond to what is happening in the real world. The real world is here in Canada, where Canadians have been kneecapped by the Liberal government for 11 years. The member talked about the investment that is happening right now, the record investment. That record investment could have happened more than 10 years ago had the Liberal government believed in the people of Canada. He talked about other records. Well, we are seeing record high youth unemployment rates, record high numbers of young people in this country who cannot find work. We have seen this. What the member has missed, because he has not been here for the full 11 years, is that his government is responsible for the reality, this real world, in Canada.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“People across Canada are struggling to afford things, including the tax on diesel. Can my colleague share examples of people in his riding who are dealing with this?”

“Mr. Speaker, this discussion regarding Bill C-38 and the tax relief on diesel is one example showing that the affordability crisis is happening all over Canada. I am wondering if my colleague could mention any examples from his riding of constituents who are affected by the affordability crisis.”

“People in my area cannot afford basic needs. Former food bank volunteers now need food help, seniors are sleeping in their cars to afford rent, and high fuel costs make groceries too expensive. The government causes these high living costs and denies there is a problem.”

“Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in my speech, I have visited food banks that are seeing their previous volunteers now coming in for assistance. I am seeing seniors who cannot afford to live in a rental unit for the full month. They are living in the rental unit for three weeks and living in their car for a week because they cannot afford the fourth week of rent. Under the devastating impacts of the Liberal cost of living crisis, it goes on and on. As I mentioned, there are young families choosing not to have children because they do not think they can afford it. We are seeing record high prices at the grocery stores as a result of fuel costs from farming and getting farm products into the processors and onto grocery store shelves. These are just some of the examples, and I am sure members from across this country are hearing about them, but the Liberals will continue to deny it.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I want to ask the member why the Liberals voted against these same fuel tax cuts months ago when the Conservatives proposed them.”

“Mr. Speaker, that is an admirable question. I will turn that right back at him and ask why Liberal members voted against the measures that we as Conservatives put forward through motions in this House. They voted against them months ago, months before the Liberals even brought this bill to the table. Why?”

“I support this bill because it pauses the fuel tax and saves people money. But this relief ends too soon. The government should extend the tax cut at least until Canada Day, remove the GST from fuel, and review other rules that make gas more expensive.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for The Eastern Peninsulas. I rise today to speak to Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act. For months, Conservatives have urged the Liberal government not to raise taxes on gas and diesel while Canadians are struggling with the cost of living. This spring, we called for the federal taxes on fuel to be lifted to give Canadians some breathing room at the pump. The Liberals responded by pausing only the fuel excise tax and only until Labour Day, just as families were heading back to school and farmers were heading into harvest. We kept pressuring, and only after months of Conservative pressure have the Prime Minister and the Liberals now agreed to delay the tax once again. I am glad the Liberals have come around. Families in London—Fanshawe and across the country will have a little more room in their budgets this winter, and Conservatives are proud of the role we played in making this happen. Let me be clear about what the bill would do. It would delay the tax increase, but only briefly. Beginning February 1, in the middle of an Ontario winter, the tax would start coming back at half the rate. By April 1, Canadians would be paying the full amount again. Relief that runs out in the middle of winter is not enough. However, I will support getting the relief to Canadians, because any relief for working people is welcome. According to the government’s own figures, the extension means that Canadians would continue to save more than five dollars on a typical 50-litre fill-up. For a family that fills up once or twice a week, that is real money. It is grocery money. It is money for a child’s hockey registration. It is money toward a heating bill. However, Canadians deserve to know that under the bill, that money would be scheduled to disappear again in a few short months. There is something else in the bill worth noting. In announcing it, the Liberal government acknowledged that fuel costs are felt across the economy. It named truckers. It named agriculture, housing, construction and delivery. It recognized that when fuel costs go up, the cost of moving food, of building materials and of everyday goods goes up with them. For years, members on this side of the House made exactly that argument, and for years, we were told that fuel taxes had little real impact on affordability. However, the bill is an acknowledgement that we were right. Fuel taxes do matter. Lowering them does help reduce cost pressures throughout the economy. The Liberals originally presented this measure as temporary. They are now extending it because the economic reality has made the case for us. If suspending the tax helps Canadians today, then keeping fuel costs low should remain a priority going forward, not something with an expiry date, because the pressure Canadians are facing has not gone away. Gas prices have risen more than a quarter. Energy costs overall are up by more than 16%. Transportation costs are up nearly 8%, and grocery prices continue to climb. Diesel, which powers the tractors that grow our food and the trucks that deliver it, has risen even more sharply. The Grain Growers of Canada has estimated that fuel for a large combine could cost over $15,000 more this harvest than last. Those costs do not stay on the farm or at the gas station. They show up at the checkout counter. In my own riding of London—Fanshawe, I hear about this constantly. When I hosted a town hall for seniors this spring, the conversation kept coming back to the cost of living. Seniors on fixed incomes told me about stretching every dollar as groceries, housing and everyday expenses kept going up. Many of them were not only worried about themselves. They were worried about their children and grandchildren, with young families working hard and still finding it difficult to get ahead. Last month at my town hall on housing and affordability, we heard those same concerns from Londoners of all ages. When rent or a mortgage takes up so much of the monthly budget, everything else becomes harder to manage: groceries, utilities and the cost of filling up the car to get to work. Again, many worry about the next generation and whether the milestones their parents could plan for, like owning a home, are slipping out of reach. I have said in the House that London is the canary in the coal mine. When the economy goes wrong, Londoners are the first to feel it, and it hits our community the hardest. Fuel costs are no exception. London is closely tied to manufacturing, transportation and the North American supply chain. Our workers commute. Our businesses ship goods. Our families drive. For many people in my riding, fuel is not a choice but a necessity, and when it costs more, London feels it first. This is not a narrow concern. Canadians across this country share it. Polling this summer found that 63% of Canadians opposed bringing the fuel excise tax back in September. That included 62% of Ontarians and 72% of seniors, with clear majorities opposed in every region of the country. Canadians across generations and across provinces agree. When life is this expensive, the federal government should not be adding to the cost of getting to work, heating a home or putting food on the table. Conservatives have been making that case for months, and Canadians have been making it with us. Rather than talking about another temporary pause, I want to use the rest of my time to put forward some ideas for real, lasting relief. First is predictability. Under this bill, this tax would begin coming back in February and return in full in April. Families, farmers and small businesses plan ahead. Spring planting is right around the corner, and many businesses are setting their budgets now. At a minimum, the Prime Minister should extend this relief at least to Canada Day so that Canadians are not facing another cliff during some of the most expensive months of the year. Second, this bill deals with only one of the federal costs layered on top of fuel. The GST is charged on gas and diesel, which means that when prices rise, the federal tax rises with them. Removing the GST on fuel would put more money back in people’s pockets at precisely the moment they need it most. Likewise, the clean fuel regulations add roughly seven cents a litre today, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, and that cost is projected to grow. As well, the industrial carbon tax continues to feed into the price of food and goods. If the Prime Minister and the Liberals now accept that fuel costs matter to affordability, then those measures deserve the same scrutiny. Third, we should take a hard look at the long-term picture. Canadians are paying noticeably more for diesel than our American neighbours. Part of the answer is building more capacity here at home, more refining, more storage and a strategic reserve that can protect Canadians from supply disruptions beyond our borders. Global events will always affect prices, but we can make sure Canada is better prepared and less exposed when they do. Canadians are doing their part. They are working hard, raising families, running businesses and adapting to challenges that are often beyond their control. Government cannot remove every one of those challenges, but it can avoid making them harder. This bill shows what is possible when the Liberal government responds to the concerns that Canadians and Conservatives have been raising. I am glad it has come this far, but a delay is not a solution, and Canadians need real relief that brings lower prices, not a pause with an expiry date. Conservatives are proud of our role in securing this relief, and we will continue to push for a more affordable Canada for the families, seniors, workers and businesses of London—Fanshawe and across this country.”

“Canadians need relief from high prices. We should pass this bill to cut taxes on fuel, especially diesel. That will lower the cost of shipping and make groceries cheaper.”

“Mr. Speaker, we are looking for relief for Canadians. There is an affordability crisis, but with regard to this bill, Canadians need relief at the pump, especially with diesel prices and the tax on diesel. Therefore, if there is relief by removing taxes on diesel, it will have a ripple effect that will affect the groceries at the grocery store and the goods that are shipped throughout Canada. Hopefully, removing these taxes on diesel would affect the bottom-line prices for Canadians and deal with the affordability crisis.”

• 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 →

“The Liberals voted against our motion to admit that life is too expensive for people right now. Admitting this could lead to cutting taxes and gas taxes for good. I want to ask my colleague to talk more about this.”

“Mr. Speaker, we put forward a motion today. The Liberals voted against our motion to admit that we are in this affordability crisis that my colleague just spoke of. I wonder if my colleague may want to share. Perhaps admitting there is an affordability crisis could lead to a permanent reduction in taxes and gas tax, to give permanent relief to Canadians. Would he like to discuss that further?”

“People in my riding tell me life is getting too expensive. I hear this from both seniors and younger generations at my town halls. This cost-of-living crisis affects them and all Canadians.”

“Mr. Speaker, in London—Fanshawe, I hear from constituents about the rising cost of living and the affordability crisis that Canadians, including the constituents of London—Fanshawe, have been facing. As I mentioned in my speech, I have had various town hall meetings. I had a town hall meeting in the spring on seniors’ concerns. I had a recent town hall meeting on housing and affordability concerns, and yes, especially at the latest town hall meeting, I heard from multiple generations who had concerns about the cost of living and also the affordability crisis that is happening to the people of London—Fanshawe and all Canadians.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  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 →

“Life is too expensive for people in my riding and across Canada. We should pass this bill to cut fuel taxes as a first step to help.”

“Mr. Speaker, the affordability crisis is there. I hear about it constantly from my constituents in London—Fanshawe. This crisis is also affecting Canadians as a whole. Therefore, with regard to Bill C-38 and removing taxes on diesel, it would be the first step in dealing with this affordability crisis that is taking place right now.”

• 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 →