Canadian Fuel Affordability Act

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

What the law does

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

Official text (opens in a new tab)

182 statements

Branden Leslie, Portage—Lisgar

Conservative
“I want this bill passed to cut the fuel tax. People are struggling to buy groceries and drive to doctor visits. We cannot control wars in other countries, but we can lower taxes to make life easier for Canadians.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, for all of us, one of the best and the worst parts of this job is hearing people’s stories, because it is important that we know them, but sometimes they are very difficult to hear. I am sure we have all heard those seniors who say they are making $20,000, and we wonder how on earth they are living and how they are eating. We all go to grocery stores. We all try to drive to medical appointments, and there are things I outlined in my speech. It is heartbreaking to hear the challenges that these people are living with. We should be doing our level best, and this is one small thing. We need to control what we can control. We cannot control wars in the Middle East or the Strait of Hormuz being closed. We cannot control any of that. The only things that we can control are the taxes that we put upon Canadians and the way that we waste money here out of Ottawa. It is time that we do better for both, and lower taxes for Canadians so we can improve their quality of life.

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

Liberal
“The member says he stands up for poor seniors, but Conservatives vote against helping them. They want to cancel the dental program that helps seniors on low incomes. I want him to tell us if he supports this dental program now.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member makes reference to the issue of the senior who makes $20,000 a year. I imagine that senior who is making $20,000 a year on a fixed income being able to receive dental benefits, yet the Conservatives want to take that dental benefit away from them. On the one hand, the member wants to stand up for seniors. On the other hand, he is voting against things that support affordability for seniors. Does that mean there is a new light that has shone over that particular member and he will say to the seniors who make $20,000 a year on a fixed income that he actually supports the dental program that the federal government is providing?

Branden Leslie, Portage—Lisgar

Conservative
“Canadians are struggling to afford food and housing. The government just spends money to build larger departments instead of actually helping people.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 26 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I support seniors living on fixed incomes, families and anybody who lives in my riding or across this country having the highest possible standard of life. We have vastly different views. As I outlined in my speech, the government sees any problem as an opportunity to create some big new bureaucracy, spend a whole bunch of money and then, when asked about the results, say, “We spent x amount of dollars”. People are struggling out there. Press releases saying they spent this much money do nothing to help feed Canadians, house them or keep them warm in the winter.

Kelly DeRidder, Kitchener Centre

Conservative

Linked statement

“The government is finally taking part of our plan to lower the cost of living. We have pushed to cut federal taxes on gas and diesel to help people at the pump and the grocery store. This bill helps, but it is only temporary. Gas prices will go right back up when the tax returns.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House and speak on behalf of the residents of Kitchener Centre. I would like to start with this: Finally, after advocating, pushing and working to put public pressure on the current government, it is agreeing to partially implement a piece of our plan to reduce the cost of living for Canadians. This all started on April 2 of this year. We started advocating to eliminate all federal tax on gas and diesel until the upcoming year to put relief for Canadians at the pumps and at the grocery stores. We were listened to, partially, but now here we are debating again, because it is coming back, it is being eliminated and the gas prices are going to immediately go up. Again, this summer we started advocating, pushing, putting public pressure and talking. Our leader, Pierre Poilievre, is saying we have got to do this—

Kelly DeRidder, Kitchener Centre

Conservative
“I support this bill, but it does not go far enough. It only cuts gas taxes by 11 cents a litre. The government should pass our full plan and cut all federal gas and diesel taxes until at least Canada Day 2027. That would save drivers 25 cents a litre. The government must also permanently cancel the industrial carbon tax and fuel regulations to make life affordable.”
  • A repeated line

    “Conservatives are calling for all federal taxes on gas and diesel to be removed until at least Canada Day 2027.”

    Said 4 times by 4 members since September 22.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Our leader advocated for Canadians saying that we need to keep this off the price of gas. That is exactly what is happening now. Finally, I would like to say it is a good start. We are keeping a portion of the gas taxes off for Canadians, but I really want to make it clear that it is not enough. Conservatives are calling for the elimination of all federal tax on gas and diesel, at least until Canada Day 2027. We have to control the affordability for Canadians inside our borders and inside this House to make life more affordable for Canadians. We need the government to listen to the Conservatives and put the whole measure in place, not just a piece of it: all federal taxes on gas and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027. The fact is that the Liberals have introduced this piece of the Conservative plan, and I am sure people can see that it is now actually being used as a talking point, which is very telling to me. The talking point is that they have put in measures to save Canadians money, 11¢ at the pump. This tells me we were right all along to say that immediate relief for Canadians is what needs to get done. Absolutely, it is 11¢, but if they took this measure the whole way, it would be 25¢ per litre of savings at the pump for Canadians moving forward. What I would like the current government to do is actually adopt our entire plan, and it could use that talking point in the future to say that it has saved 25¢ per litre for Canadians. At the end of the day, what we are doing here is saving money and making life more affordable for Canadians who desperately need it. Of course, we will be supporting this. It is the Conservative plan. Absolutely, we will be supporting this. Our Conservative Party is now asking for the current government to eliminate all federal taxes on gas and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027 to save Canadians 25¢ per litre, not just 11¢ per litre. Over the summer, we have worked tirelessly for Canadians. In our role as the opposition, we have continued to work and advocate over the summer for what we can do inside our borders to help with the pressures and get the relief that Canadians need moving forward. We have listened to their stories at the dinner table. We have met with Canadians. We have had the hard conversations over the summer, about having to choose between heating their home or putting food in their refrigerator. Some people are on the verge of losing their jobs because they cannot even afford to put gas in their tank to get to work. It is this snowball effect that we are seeing happen. Through this parliamentary session we will continue to work for Canadians, to advocate for Canadians, to reduce the cost of living and to get us through what Canadians are facing now. We will keep putting pressure on the government, because we are listening. I want all Canadians, including residents of Kitchener Centre, to know that this political landscape that we are in today is not their fault. They are working hard, and raising a family or maybe they are on their own and cannot afford the essentials of life. This is what is not okay in Canada today. This is what we can actually control inside Canada today. We want to create a Canada again where Canadians can put food on their table, get to work, have a full gas tank and a full wallet, and still save for their future. There are youth out there who are thinking they are never going to be able get a home. That is not the Canada that we deserve. That is not the Canada we should live in. We will continue advocating and putting pressure on the current government to get us back into the place we used to be. The current Prime Minister stood in the House yesterday and told Canadians that the tariff war, the Iranian war and the Ukrainian war are what is driving up the cost of living for Canadians. I think that what we need to do, concentrating on the government, is focus on what we can control inside our borders. We need to focus on the reliefs and measures that we can put in place. Canadians do not want to hear about exponential crises that are the cause for the fact that they cannot put food on the table. They want to hear there are measures being put in place to help them live a life they are used to living inside our Canadian borders. I do not think John from Kitchener, who is now buying prepared meals for himself and his wife because he has to work two jobs just to stay afloat and does not have time to cook for his family anymore, wants to hear about what is happening in Ukraine or Iran. John wants to hear about tax relief, about removing the fuel standards tax, so that our grocery and gas prices come down. These are the measures that John wants to hear about. Paul in Kitchener says that he is being taxed too much, cannot afford to live anymore and does not know what he is going to do for his future. I am speaking to John and Paul directly right now. Conservatives understand. We are working, applying pressure and making sure that the government puts measures in place to help them with their everyday lives, with what they are saying at their kitchen tables and making sure their voices are heard in Ottawa so we can bring down the cost of living and inflationary spending and move toward a more affordable future for Canadians. We found more solutions than Bill C-38. We found solutions that are calling on the government to adopt all of these measures moving forward. Number one I have already said a couple of times today, which is to eliminate all federal tax on gas and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027 so we can reduce the price at the pumps by 25¢, not 11¢. It will affect our groceries and people will feel it immediately at the pump. We want the government to permanently scrap the fuel regulations and industrial carbon tax so those taxes never come back on Canadians. My colleagues fought for 10 years. I did not as I am honoured to be here for my first term, but my colleagues fought for 10 years saying this carbon tax was detrimental. We won that debate, but the Liberals need to take it the full way. They need to remove the industrial carbon tax and the fuel standards tax for Canadians as well, more than a 1% cut for the lowest tax bracket. I want to mention that over the summer, the Conservative team found $150 billion in savings. There is a weird misconception that Conservatives want to save money by cutting services or social programs. That is absolutely not true. This $150 billion in savings is inflationary spending on consultants, projects that are not being built but where money is being spent and fake asylum claims. The list goes on and on. What I am saying to Canadians today is Conservatives are here for them. We have presented our solutions to the current government. We are listening to Canadians. Moving forward, we will push the government and work for it to create a more affordable life for people here in Canada.

Jacques Ramsay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Liberal
“We acted quickly to pause the fuel tax after the war started. The Conservatives want to make this tax cut permanent, but no expert can predict oil prices that far ahead.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, after listening to the Conservatives, the perception is that this government has been slow to react. I would like to remind my friend on the other side of the aisle that the Iranian war started on February 28 and by April, this government came up with the fuel tax suspension. It is not adequate to say that we have been slow to react. I think we have actually been quite quick to react. The Conservatives would like to make this measure permanent. If they want us to make this permanent, then I must assume the Conservatives feel they can confidently predict oil prices over the next six to 12 months. I certainly have not heard any expert saying that, so I am curious to know how they can.

Kelly DeRidder, Kitchener Centre

Conservative
“I want the government to completely get rid of the carbon tax. It hurts our economy. Pausing fuel taxes is only a half-measure, and we need to lower the cost of living for Canadians.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to set the record straight. I did not say the government was slow to react. I said that the Conservatives have applied pressure for 10 years advocating for that. We said the carbon tax was going to be detrimental to our economy. That is the debate that we won and the debate we are moving forward with. We are asking the government now to completely eliminate it, not just a half-measure or little pieces but completely eliminate it. It should not put in question the prices of oil or exponential circumstances that we have no control over. We have control to reduce the cost of living for Canadians, and that is what we should be implementing today.

Ellis Ross, Skeena—Bulkley Valley

Conservative
“The government voted down our earlier plans to cut fuel taxes. Families could have saved money if the government had supported our ideas back in April.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it was just mentioned by one of the Liberal government members that it does not matter where the idea comes from. Yes, it does for the Liberal government, because this idea was brought up in April, and previous to that other measures were presented by the Conservatives. They were all voted down by a majority of the House. This is exactly what we are talking about today. To the member, if the Conservative proposal put on the floor back in April was actually approved in April, how much savings could that have brought to families and citizens across Canada?

Kelly DeRidder, Kitchener Centre

Conservative
“We did the math. If this tax cut had started right away, it would have saved the average Canadian $1,000 on gas over the year.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we have done the math, and if the full measure had been implemented right away, it would have saved the average Canadian $1,000 at the fuel pump over the course of the year.

Greg Fergus, Hull—Aylmer

Liberal
“Permanently cutting taxes will not make life more affordable. If the government cuts taxes, oil companies will just raise their prices.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, a permanent tax reduction is the Conservatives’ go-to response in every situation. How would that improve affordability? How is that going to help people, when the reality is that if the Government of Canada permanently reduces taxes, the oil companies will jack up their prices?

Kelly DeRidder, Kitchener Centre

Conservative
“We do not want to cut all taxes. We want to cut the fuel standards tax and the industrial tax. These taxes hurt our economy, and getting rid of them will make life more affordable.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we never said that we want to completely cut the taxes across the board for all Canadians. We do want to cut the fuel standards tax and the industrial tax. They are just another version of the previous tax the Liberals that we have fought against for 10 years. They have an economic impact on our society, and it is time to completely get rid of these taxes so we can go back to an affordable life.

Ellis Ross, Skeena—Bulkley Valley

Conservative
“The government claims things have never been more affordable, but it also admits people are struggling. If things are so good, why cannot people afford food and gas?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government just cannot get it right. On one hand, its members say that affordability is the best it has been for 10 years. On the other side, they recognize the affordability crisis our constituents are facing in Canada. To the member, where are these stories coming from of Canadians struggling to put food on the table or gas in their gas tank?

Kelly DeRidder, Kitchener Centre

Conservative
“Average Canadians are really struggling right now, having to choose between heat and food. The government is listening to consultants instead of giving regular people tax relief on fuel.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I do not think they are coming from the average Canadian. The average Canadian is really struggling right now. Canadians are struggling with everything. Their mental health is even being affected because they are having to choose between heat and food. These stories are not coming from the grassroots. They are not coming from people at their kitchen tables. They are coming from consultants or someone who thinks it is a better idea to do something different than give Canadians a little relief.

Don Davies, Vancouver Kingsway

NDP
“I do not want this bill to pass. Pausing the fuel tax did not lower gas prices for drivers. Gas costs more now than when the pause started, and oil companies kept the savings. Instead of helping big oil companies, we should tax their huge profits and give that money back to Canadians. We should also invest in clean energy.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill C-38, the Canadian fuel affordability act, which would temporarily extend the government’s fuel tax suspension at a further cost of $2.9 billion. No party in the House has raised greater concern about the affordability crisis facing working Canadians and their families than the New Democrat Party. We know how expensive life has become with the sky-high costs of groceries, fuel and housing, and we know that Canadians need effective relief now. Unfortunately, the policy contained in this bill, which would ultimately cost over $5 billion, has failed to deliver the lower fuel prices Canadians were promised. When this tax suspension was first implemented last April, New Democrats warned that its impact on prices at the pump would be limited because nothing in the legislation guaranteed that savings would actually reach consumers. We argued then that there was nothing to stop oil companies from absorbing some or all of the tax cuts themselves. We were right. Canadians are now paying more for gasoline today than they did in April, and substantially more than they were paying before the latest global energy crisis began. On the day the tax suspension took effect, the national average price of gasoline was $1.69 per litre. Today it stands at $1.83 per litre. It is also more than 60¢ per litre higher than it was last Christmas, before the U.S.-Israeli invasion of Iran sent oil markets into turmoil. The government has essentially given billions of taxpayer dollars directly to the oil companies, some of the most profitable corporations on the planet. While Canadians struggle with the cost of living, oil and gas giants are poised to collect $90 billion in profits this year alone, not because of innovation or increased productivity, but because they are gouging consumers. That is why New Democrats have opposed this policy from the outset, and why we continue to advocate for the future a better, more effective way to help struggling consumers, which is a windfall profits tax on oil and gas companies with the proceeds returned to Canadians who need relief. This is not a radical idea. We have done it before in times of crisis. Canada imposed excess profits taxes during both world wars. The Liberals themselves imposed an excess profits tax on banks during the pandemic. It is an approach that makes sense. A windfall profits tax avoids the pitfalls we have just seen from the flawed policy contained in this legislation. It cannot be captured as corporate profits. It allows support to be targeted to those who need it the most. It does not encourage greater fossil fuel consumption at a time when the world is facing a climate emergency. The irony of this fuel tax suspension is hard to ignore. Canadians who have chosen to reduce their emissions by purchasing electric vehicles, taking public transit, cycling or making other environmentally responsible choices are being forced to pay for another fossil fuel subsidy while receiving none of the benefits. We cannot ignore the opportunity cost of delaying our transition to the sustainable energy sources of the future. Every dollar spent propping up an industry that is already enormously profitable is a dollar not invested in the technologies that could lower energy costs, strengthen our economy and free Canadians from the endless roller coaster of oil and gas prices. The world is changing far faster than many people realize. In the early 2020s, we crossed an important threshold. For the first time, solar power became cheaper than fossil fuels and cheaper than coal, making it the lowest cost source of electricity available. Wind power followed closely behind as the second cheapest source. By 2024, over 92% of all new electricity generation added globally came from renewable sources. Solar power is now being installed at a staggering pace around the world, with more than a gigawatt of capacity being added every single day. That is equivalent to the output of a large, coal-fired power plant or a nuclear reactor. The world now possesses the manufacturing capacity to produce as many solar panels as climate scientists say we need. The old arguments that clean energy is too expensive, too unreliable or incapable of meeting our energy needs simply do not withstand scrutiny. The global energy transition is no longer a question of possibility. It is already under way. While the Liberal government spends billions subsidizing fossil fuels, other countries, from Europe to China, are investing in the industries that will create the jobs, exports, productivity gains and economic opportunities of the future. This transformation is not limited to only wealthy countries. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute, renewable energy capacity is growing twice as fast in countries of the global south as it is in developed countries. Communities that have historically lacked reliable access to energy are increasingly leapfrogging directly to clean electricity. These examples matter because they show that the transition is about far more than reducing emissions. It is about freedom, freedom from volatile energy prices, freedom from domination by oil and gas monopolies and freedom from the dangerous geopolitics that have always accompanied fossil fuels, where access to energy can be manipulated, restricted and weaponized. We can see the consequences of that reality unfolding right now in Cuba. For more than 60 years, Cuba has lived under an illegal U.S. economic blockade that has been repeatedly condemned by the overwhelming majority of countries at the United Nations. Today, that pressure is intensified into an American effort to choke off Cuba’s energy supply altogether. When fuel is cut off, hospitals struggle to operate, water systems fail, food spoils and ordinary people suffer. Let us be clear, this is not an unintended consequence. Humanitarian catastrophe is the objective. Canada has a long tradition of pursuing an independent relationship with Cuba. We have maintained diplomatic relations since 1945, consistently opposed the U.S. economic blockade and built deep cultural and commercial ties between our peoples, yet, as humanitarian conditions worsen and the Trump administration cruelly and illegally blockades Cuba’s fuel supplies, the Liberal government has refused to speak out. That silence is difficult to reconcile with the principles articulated by the Prime Minister in his speech in Davos. There, he argued that middle powers like Canada have a responsibility to defend sovereignty, human rights and solidarity rather than bowing to the exercise of power by stronger states. He cautioned against the temptation to “go along to get along” in the face of coercion and intimidation from superpowers. Those are admirable principles, but if they mean anything, they must apply to Canada and Cuba as well. Canada should speak out strongly and demand that Donald Trump rescind his illegal blockade. We should stand with the Cuban people by providing immediate energy support to keep essential services running while helping the country rapidly build the renewable energy capacity needed to free itself from imported fossil fuels and the threat of future energy blockades. This is ultimately the lesson before us today. Investments in clean energy are not simply climate policy. They are affordable policy. They are industrial policy. They are security policy. They are investments in a future where communities are less vulnerable to geopolitical conflict, less dependent on scarce resources and more capable of determining their own destiny. The technology exists. The costs have fallen. The solutions are available, so let us stop the destructive and senseless expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure and consumption on a planet crying out for relief. Let us stop subsidizing the oil and gas industry, which does not need the money. Canadians do. Let us start investing in the energy supplies of the future that will lower costs, create jobs, build our economy and protect our planet. Canadians can count on New Democrats to support positive and constructive policies in this place that will actually help them with the affordability crisis they are facing. We will continue to oppose corporate giveaways by the Liberal government, which are supported by the Conservative Party, that simply enrich corporations while Canadians struggle every day.

Corey Hogan, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources

Liberal
“The world is moving toward green energy, but that transition takes time. It does not help Canadians who drive gas cars and face high fuel prices today. Pausing the fuel tax helps them right now. I want to know if my colleague supports short-term relief like this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague that energy consumption is changing globally. Perhaps I do not see it happening as rapidly as he hopes, but I agree that the world is in the process of electrifying and greening, and cost curves are clear for renewables and storage. However, that does not provide relief today to Canadians affected by price spikes driven from global uncertainty or Canadians who own combustion engine vehicles. It seems to me that postponing the excise tax is a practical and prudent response in the short term. I would ask my colleague if he sees a place for short-term affordability measures, such as the suspension of the excise tax.

Don Davies, Vancouver Kingsway

NDP
“I want this bill changed before we pass it. Cutting the gas tax did not lower gas prices because oil companies just raised their prices. This bill needs a rule that forces oil companies to pass the tax savings on to drivers.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think what my hon. colleague and I agree on is that Canadians need immediate relief and need help with the affordability crisis. I pointed out, and quoted statistics on this, that the policy of the Liberal government to cut the excise tax on oil and gas has not resulted in that. That is not just my opinion. It is the numbers; it is the math. I quoted that the price of gas the day before the Liberals dropped the excise tax back in April was lower than it is today. The prices are much higher today at the pump, and there was no mechanism whatsoever to ensure that oil companies did not just raise prices when the excise tax came down. That was a criticism we raised at the time, and it is probably a mechanism that should be put in this legislation as well to make sure that every penny of this tax relief goes to consumers. That might actually help Canadians, but this legislation does not require it.

William Stevenson, Yellowhead

Conservative
“Cutting this tax saves drivers money at the pump. I want the member to explain his claim that it helps oil companies instead.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused by the NDP member’s comments about rounding the math. I do not want to criticize him for going off topic so much, because I will probably do a bit of that in three hours when I have to speak, but in some of his comments, he said that taking this tax off would somehow subsidize the oil companies. I do not see how he can say that when it is going to help take taxes off the consumer at the pump. Could he explain how he rounds that math?

Don Davies, Vancouver Kingsway

NDP
“Cutting the fuel tax failed to help Canadians. Oil companies just raised their prices, and gas costs more now than it did before the tax cut.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is very easy math. In fact, it is not just math. It is what has actually happened in the last five months. When the tax was cut at the pump, nothing stopped oil companies from bumping up prices, so the consumer ended up paying more anyway. That is what we are talking about, and there is no price control on the oil companies whatsoever. Here are the statistics taken from the Statistics Canada website. This is what the government says. On the day the tax suspension took effect, the national average price of gasoline was $1.69 per litre. Today, it stands at $1.83 per litre. I think it is pretty obvious that if we are paying $1.83 a litre today and were paying $1.69 a litre before this policy came in, we are paying more for gas today. The policy has failed.

Mario Simard, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets

Bloc Québécois
“This bill will help oil and gas companies make bigger profits instead of helping people who need it most. We should give that money to low-income seniors through their pensions instead.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague entirely. While the intention may be commendable, the indicators suggest that the assistance may not reach the people who are struggling the most. As legislators, the last thing we want is to help greedy oil and gas companies make bigger profits. We definitely need a mechanism to ensure that the tax relief goes directly to the most vulnerable. I have a solution, and I wonder if my colleague would agree with me. Instead of sending oil and gas companies billions of dollars in tax credits and support, would it not be better to increase old age security for the most vulnerable, for seniors struggling to put food on the table with nothing but the GIS and OAS to rely on? That might be a better solution.

Don Davies, Vancouver Kingsway

NDP
“Cutting the gas tax did not help drivers. Gas costs 14 cents more per litre now, and oil companies kept the savings as profit. We should tax their extra profits instead and give that money to Canadians who need it.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is absolutely right. The intentions of this policy may have been good, but the execution has failed miserably. People are paying 14¢ per litre more today for gas than they were before the government decided to give $5 billion in a cut to the fuel excise tax. That is because oil companies pocketed the difference. Here is another piece of math, and it is a matter of public record. Oil and gas companies are on course to making $90 billion in profit this year. Where did the $5 billion go? It did not go into the pockets of people who were filling their tanks. They are paying more today. Oil companies are making more. It is clear where the money went, and that is why the NDP is pushing for a windfall profits tax to take a piece of those profits from the oil and gas industry and then direct that money to the Canadians who really need it.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 141

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