SoVote

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/17/22 3:49:04 p.m.
Watch

I am sorry. The hon. member's time is up. I have been trying to give her some signals, but she was quite into her speech and I can understand that this is a very important issue. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

49 words

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

May/17/22 3:49:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, families in Cowichan—Malahat—Langford right now, when they are filling up their vehicles, are looking at those eye-watering prices, and then they read the news and hear about the billions of dollars of profits that oil companies are making. Then, to add insult to injury, they learn that their hard-earned taxpayer dollars are directly subsidizing those companies, especially in unproven technology. I have a very clear question for my hon. colleague: Does she not agree that this is precisely the wrong time to continue subsidizing oil companies, not only because of the climate danger, but because of the pressure that working families are feeling? Is it not time to directly invest those dollars, instead, into the pockets of working families to help them out and give them a break? I want to hear a clear answer from my Liberal colleague on putting that money directly into working families' pockets through an increase in the GST credit.

163 words

Ms. Arielle Kayabaga

May/17/22 3:50:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my colleague across the aisle. I believe that our government has been working to invest in making life more affordable for Canadians. There are a number of measures that we put in budget 2022 to make sure that families are able to afford life. There are things that we are working through right now, after the pandemic, but we are taking strong measures to have a green recovery, to invest in child care, to invest in families, to invest in young Canadians being able to afford homes. I understand that gas prices have been frustrating, as the member on the other side mentioned, but the important part is that we are committed to making sure that life is more affordable for Canadians and we have taken measures to do so.

137 words

Mr. Ted Falk (Provencher, CPC)

May/17/22 3:51:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member from London West made the comment that most Canadian families are getting a bigger carbon tax credit than the carbon tax they would incur throughout the year. I would suggest that a lot of the carbon tax that families are going to be incurring throughout the year is now hidden in the cost of goods and services and we can see that, whether it is on the grocery shelves, in the lumber stores or in retail shops. Can the member explain to us exactly why she thinks that the average Canadian family will actually receive more back than it is costing them? The costs will certainly be hidden.

112 words

Ms. Arielle Kayabaga

May/17/22 3:52:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I find that question very interesting, because I did mention the numbers and the amount of money that we are going to be putting in the pockets of single people and families to make sure that Canadians are getting the money from this tax back. Once again, I just want to reiterate that budget 2022's main goal and primary driver is to make life more affordable for Canadians, and we are doing that.

76 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

May/17/22 3:53:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to point out that Canada subsidizes the oil and gas sector more heavily than any other G20 country. The member talked a lot about subsidies for families, but I would like to talk about subsidies for oil companies. She spoke about the carbon tax. On one hand, the government is taxing carbon, taxing pollution, but then on the other hand, it is subsidizing the polluters. Does she not find that somewhat illogical?

77 words

Ms. Arielle Kayabaga

May/17/22 3:53:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, once again, I want to reiterate that our government is committed to reducing fossil fuel subsidies. At COP26, we reiterated our commitment to phase out Canada's fossil fuel subsidies by 2023, two years earlier than originally planned. We continue to do that and we continue to do all that we can to have a green recovery for all Canadians.

62 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP)

May/17/22 3:54:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague, the member for Vancouver East. We put forward this motion for a number of reasons. I want to lay out, first of all, the context. In our country right now, Canadians are paying over $2 a litre for gas. That means that families are being hurt. Families have been isolated because of this pandemic and have not been able to visit their close ones, and now, when they finally have the opportunity, they are considering cancelling road trips to visit dear family members because they simply cannot afford it. What makes it even more offensive is that oil and gas companies are posting massive profits, in some cases record profits. Imperial Oil is experiencing the highest profits it has enjoyed in 30 years. In light of that, what adds insult to injury is that the Liberal government continues to hand out billions of dollars in subsidies to these very profitable oil and gas companies. That is wrong. Gasoline costs more than $2 a litre in much of the country. People are struggling, and it is getting harder and harder to make ends meet. At the same time, these oil companies are making huge profits, record profits in some cases. It gets worse. The Liberal government continues to throw billions of dollars in subsidies at these companies. People are struggling, while big oil is making record profits. That is unacceptable, and we are saying that we can do things differently and fix this problem. Any time the cost of everything goes up, it hurts families, but there are also winners. While families are hurt as the cost of living goes up, inflation rises and gas rises, oil and gas companies are benefiting from this moment. The sad thing is that the only solutions ever proposed in times when there is inflation are measures that make things even worse for families, increasing interest rates, which only further squeezes families that are already so hurt. Why is it that the only response in difficult times is to put more pressure and burden on the families and workers who are already struggling? The New Democrats contend that to deal with the rising cost of living, to deal with the cost of goods going up and to deal with inflation, we have to find a solution that does not follow the traditional path of putting more burden on families. We have to find a solution that helps families, does not put the burden on them, lifts them up and provides them with support. Whenever the cost of living rises, there are winners and there are losers. Families lose because the cost of living goes up and it gets harder and harder to make ends meet. Oil companies win because they rake in huge, record profits. The only solutions proposed, traditionally, actually make things worse for workers and families. New Democrats believe profoundly that we need solutions that help workers and families, and that is exactly what we are going to put forward. I want to be very clear. Whenever the cost of living rises and inflation rises, there are winners and there are losers. Families are hurt, workers are hurt and people who are precariously employed are hurt, but the oil and gas companies are benefiting. They are winning. They are making more and more profit, and the only solutions proposed, traditionally, are solutions that put further and further weight and burden on the shoulders of families. That has to end. The New Democrats believe profoundly that we need solutions to deal with the cost of living and inflation that actually support families, help workers and lift people up. People across this country are paying hundreds of dollars more in their costs, and oil and gas companies are enjoying record profits. On top of that, they are receiving billions of dollars of public money, which is our money. Our solution is to stop subsidizing already profitable companies, end those subsidies and invest that money back into people by doubling the GST tax credit, increasing the child benefit and supporting families that need help the most. While oil and gas companies make massive profits as the cost of oil rises and enjoy profits they have never seen in 30 years, the New Democrats are calling on the government to end fossil fuel subsidies and use that public money to invest in people, to support families and to invest in renewable energy. That is the way forward. Right now, families are struggling. They are spending hundreds of dollars more because the cost of living and the cost of gas have gone up. New Democrats want to end fossil fuel subsidies and invest that money to help families. We want to double the GST tax credit, increase the Canada child benefit and invest in renewable energy in our country. That is what we see as the way forward, a way that will do more to help people. Families are struggling at the pumps with the cost of gas going up. At the same time, families are struggling with worry about the climate crisis. We have seen the impact in our lives in B.C., with intense flooding and intense record-setting temperatures, the cost of which was a loss of lives. We see flooding and forest fires across the country. We know that the impact of the climate crisis is real and it is now, and instead of giving public money to these profitable oil and gas companies, we must end those subsidies and use that public money to fight the climate crisis, invest in renewable energy, support workers who are hurt by the climate crisis and help families that are struggling with the cost of living. While the Liberals talk about ending fossil fuel subsidies, their actions are very different. Instead of ending fossil fuel subsidies in this budget, they have increased them by $2.6 billion for a carbon capture tax credit, which we are not very certain is actually going to help in tackling the climate crisis. Either way, we should force profitable companies to do the right thing, be environmentally conscious and make the right decisions to protect our planet and our environment. We should also be spending public money on sectors that need more support, such as the renewable energy sector, so that we can have renewable energy in our country and good jobs that are long-lasting. At the end of the day, politics is about choices. The choices we make reflect the priorities we have. It is clear that the Liberal government's priority is protecting the profits of billion-dollar oil and gas companies. It continues to give them billions of dollars more in public money instead of standing up for workers, families and people struggling with the cost of living. The New Democrats would make different choices. Our choice would be to end the billions of dollars in public money flowing to profitable companies and use those financial resources to help families and people and invest in renewable energy. There are better choices we can make, and the New Democrats are outlining those better decisions.

1198 words

All Topics

Mr. Patrick Weiler (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, Lib.)

May/17/22 4:03:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, Canada has made the ambitious target of reducing emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40%, relative to current levels, by 2030, and is in the process right now of developing regulations to cap emissions and have them steadily reduced to net zero by 2050. I think we would all agree on the need to reduce emissions, but as we develop more stringent regulations, there is a risk that jobs and investment could move to countries that have less stringent regulations but have deposits of energy. Would the member for Burnaby South want Canada to work with industry to reduce emissions and keep jobs in Canada, or would he rather that emissions be eliminated in Canada simply by eliminating production and we move them to another country?

130 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh

May/17/22 4:04:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to remind the member that today's motion is about ending fossil fuel subsidies. How does it make any sense that as a G7 nation we give billions of dollars to a sector that is already profitable and is right now making massive if not record profits? I would contend that makes absolutely no sense. Instead, we should be spending our public money, those precious public dollars, on helping workers who are impacted by the climate crisis and whose jobs go through bust and boom cycles. We should invest it in families that are struggling with the cost of living and invest it in building more renewable energy, which we know we need today and for the future. This is really the fundamental question here: Why would we be giving profitable companies more public dollars?

139 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis (Cumberland—Colchester, CPC)

May/17/22 4:05:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what I find interesting is this trumped-up indignation that the member has with respect to the coalition party, which his party continues to support. I also find this really fascinating: When this side of the House proposed a cut of eight cents per litre to the price of gasoline, where was the member's party? That is the question I have. We talk about choice. That is a choice. When are we going to make this change, vote against the government and end the speNDP-Liberal coalition? Will the member commit to that?

96 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh

May/17/22 4:06:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I find it fascinating that the member would use the word “trumped” when there are a lot of concerns about his party being affiliated with that type of rhetoric and ideology. It is very troubling. We are talking about billions of dollars in subsidies. The member is talking about eight cents. We are talking about doubling the child benefit and increasing the GST tax credit in a direct way so they go directly to families in need. The member is talking about an idea to get help to people that may or may not work. We are talking about getting help directly to people in need. I think the member would rather protect the profits of the oil and gas sector than help families that are struggling right now.

133 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

May/17/22 4:07:20 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, 30,000 Canadians and 400 academics have said that we must not invest in carbon capture and storage. When the member for Burnaby South says that the federal government must stop giving subsidies and invest in renewable energy, I would like to know in what year he thinks that should start. It is surely not 2022, because he is supporting the budget, which includes $2.4 billion for carbon capture and storage. When should the government stop the subsidies?

82 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh

May/17/22 4:07:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we completely agree that the Liberal government's approach is the wrong one and that it will not solve the current crisis. The crisis requires urgent action. We want the government to stop, cancel and eliminate oil subsidies immediately, this year. We want it to reinvest in the priorities of Canadians, families and workers and in renewable energy.

60 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

May/17/22 4:08:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the motion put forward by my colleague, the member for Victoria. The NDP motion calls for the government to stop using Canadian taxpayers’ money to subsidize oil and gas companies, and to instead reinvest that money into renewable energy and measures to help Canadians with the rising cost of living. The motion could not have come at a more desperately needed time. This week, constituents in my riding are paying over $2 a litre for gas at the pump. Many of the people scraping together the necessary funds to pay for fuel are essential workers, small business owners, families with young children and people with mobility challenges who need to drive for their livelihoods or to access essential goods and services. Canadian families are already struggling with sky-high housing costs and income precarity exacerbated by the ongoing pandemic. Even before the rise in gas prices, people were living paycheque to paycheque and struggling to make ends meet. Retirees and people on fixed incomes have not seen a rise in income to account for the rise in living costs. By glaring contrast, the oil and gas companies are making record profits, while being heavily subsidized by taxpayers’ money. This grossly unjust situation is a direct result of the government’s heavily misaligned priorities. The NDP motion calls on the government to fix this dire situation and place people and the planet before oil and gas company profits. As Canadians are struggling more than ever, we are also faced with the most urgent crisis of our time: the climate change crisis. The most recent IPCC report states: It is unequivocal that climate change has already disrupted human and natural systems. It goes on to say: Societal choices and actions implemented in the next decade determine the extent to which medium- and long-term pathways will deliver higher or lower climate resilient development.... Importantly climate resilient development prospects are increasingly limited if current greenhouse gas emissions do not rapidly decline, especially if 1.5°C global warming is exceeded in the near term. A new climate update issued by the World Meteorological Organization pointed out that there is a fifty-fifty chance that the annual average global temperature will temporarily reach 1.5°C above the pre-industrial level for at least one of the next five years, and this likelihood is increasing with time. Let us just think about that for one minute. They are saying that we are not going to meet our target. I should not need to remind anyone in this house of the importance of the 1.5° mark. Climate scientists have long established that holding global warming to 1.5° could limit the most dangerous and irreversible effects of climate change. Our global temperatures have already risen by 1.1° since pre-industrial levels. We are already feeling the devastating effects of climate change. B.C., my province, has just experienced one of the most challenging years of extreme weather in recent memory, with a heat dome that shattered temperature records and killed hundreds of people, followed by weather bombs that destroyed critical infrastructure, livestock and agricultural lands with record precipitation and floods. For days, B.C. was cut off from the rest of Canada by rail and road because of the damages from the unprecedented floods. Left unchecked, extreme weather connected to climate change will continue to wreak havoc on Canadian lives and livelihoods. Around the globe, we are witnessing how climate change has caused substantial damage to terrestrial, freshwater and coastal and ocean marine ecosystems. We are seeing glaciers melt, mountains change and permafrost thaw in the Arctic ecosystem. Let us be clear: This is the result of human-induced climate change. That is why we must fight the climate crisis like we mean to win. Despite the urgency of the climate crisis on our doorstep, Canada has failed to meet any of its climate targets to reduce carbon emissions over the past 40 years. In fact, not only has Canada repeatedly failed to meet its climate targets, Canada is also one of the few wealthy countries where carbon emissions continue to rise. Industrialized and wealthy nations are responsible for most of the greenhouse gas emissions in the world, but the effects of climate change impact developing nations and indigenous peoples the hardest. Climate justice is justice, period. Continuing to subsidize oil and gas companies while delaying the economic and infrastructure overhaul and transition to green energy is the very opposite of climate leadership that Canadians and the world so desperately need. The new carbon capture tax credit is, in effect, a $2.6-billion subsidy to oil and gas disguised as a so-called climate solution by the Liberal government. It is the wrong path to take. Earlier this year, more than 400 Canadian climate scientists and academics pleaded with the finance minister to scrap the plan to create the carbon capture tax credit. Professor Christina Hoicka, from the University of Victoria, stated that carbon capture is expensive and unproven in its effectiveness in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Julia Levin, senior climate and energy program manager, stated that by relying on unproven “techno-fixes”, the government is “gambling with our lives.” Carbon capture projects exist at the demonstration level only, and have not successfully been deployed at the scale needed to make them part of a viable pathway to reach net-zero by 2050. More than 80% of the carbon capture projects attempted in the United States have ended in failure. Shell's Quest carbon capture facility near Edmonton is emitting more greenhouse gas than it captures. Across the board, scientists are calling for the government to invest in proven climate solutions, including renewable energy, efficient affordable housing and the electrification of transportation as the way to go. The choices we make today will have a lasting impact on future generations. It has long been my belief, and the NDP's belief, that a just transition must not only create a healthier environment, but also create better opportunities and improve affordability for Canadian workers and families. A just transition creates good jobs in the renewable energy sector and supports workers and communities in transitioning to jobs in this sector. Canada could become a world leader in renewable energy development. Investing in energy-efficient home retrofits and affordable energy-efficient new homes, as well as investing in a robust electric public transit system, would make life more affordable for Canadians and reduce emissions. In other words, a just transition would help to build a stronger, resilient economy. It is an opportunity that any government that values people and the planet would jump on. Instead, Canada is spending 14 times more on financial support to the fossil-fuel sector than it does on renewable energy. The Liberals promised a just transition act in 2019, but have failed to deliver and were recently rebuked by the Environment Commissioner for their lack of a plan to support workers and communities through the transition to a low-carbon economy. At the same time, oil and gas companies are making record profits, and Canadians are being decimated at the pump with record-high prices while the world is on the brink of a climate disaster. The majority of Canadians are concerned about climate change and affordability as the cost of living continues to rise. If the Liberals eliminated the tax credits for oil and gas exploration and development right now, it would bring in almost $10 billion over the next four years. Instead—

1277 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/17/22 4:18:51 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member's time is up. I have been trying to signal that to her. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Kings—Hants.

26 words

Hants
Time

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

May/17/22 4:19:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague made it very clear that she is against any type of public financing for the oil and gas sector. The way I view it is that this particular tax credit is meant to incentivize a reduction in emissions, but I respect her point and her view on this. My question is a bit broader. Does she feel the Government of Canada has a role in working with private-sector entities to reduce emissions? She has made it very clear that she does not support that in the oil and gas sector. Where would she delineate, if at all, whether or not the Government of Canada should be providing these types of incentives to other private-sector industries?

122 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan

May/17/22 4:19:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, instead of subsidizing very profitable big oil companies, the government can provide immediate relief to struggling Canadians by suspending the GST on residential energy bills, doubling the GST tax credit and increasing the Canada child benefit to all recipients by $500. That would be an immediate help for Canadians. By the way, the oil and gas industry should be paying for the work that needs to be done to make the planet better. It is making record profits and can afford to do it. There is no good reason why the Canadian Liberal government continues to subsidize it. That money should be invested in people and renewable energy.

110 words

Mr. Greg McLean (Calgary Centre, CPC)

May/17/22 4:20:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I heard the member refer in her speech to the same misinformation we identified earlier when we talked about a lie, which was propagated by a subsidiary of Tides International. It is the only place where this “14 times” number comes up. I hope she is happy, in this House of Commons, as she and her colleagues continue to repeat that misinformation, but they should recognize what it is. I am going to challenge the member on the whole thing: on carbon capture, utilization and storage, because she talked about it being at a demonstration level only in Canada. She also referred to the Shell Quest facility. Shell Quest is using the technology it has at Edmonton in the Northern Lights project that is offshore of Norway, which has a better tax regime than Canada with respect to carbon capture, utilization and storage. Can she comment on why we have developed technology in Canada that is now leaving to be exploited around the world in other environmental countries that are approaching the same problem?

178 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan

May/17/22 4:21:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I did not realize the member was a scientist. I did not realize we should trust someone who is frankly right in the pockets of big oil instead of the scientists who have brought forward the evidence. The last time I checked, I would rather trust the scientists than the Conservatives. Let me say this on the issue of carbon capture. If that is the technology to be used, as the member suggests, why does the oil and gas industry not pay for it itself? Why does it need a subsidy from the Canadian government? I hope the member realizes that money should be invested in communities and Canadians who need that support and are being gouged right now at the pumps.

124 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 73