44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 27, 2022 10:00AM
- Sep/27/22 10:30:41 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I very much enjoyed the speech from the new Conservative leader. However, I noticed there was something missing in the centrepiece of his economic policy, relating to the advice he gave to Canadians to invest in cryptocurrency.
The Leader of the Opposition has refused to answer questions on his advice to Canadians to invest in cryptocurrency as a way to opt out of inflation. Does he stand by that advice today?
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/27/22 10:41:34 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Winnipeg South.
Here we are on the first opposition day. As many commentators and Canadians have noted, the new Conservative leader has no plan to fight climate change and no plan to make life more affordable for Canadians.
He did not mention the climate crisis once during the leadership race, nor did he have any concrete proposals to support people in need. Contrary to what the opposition leader's highly misleading motion suggests, our tax credit for climate action puts more money in the pockets of eight out of 10 Canadian families.
We know there are people, members opposite, who are trying to block and delay the government from mitigating the impact of inflation on Canadians. The new Leader of the Opposition said just last week that the new proposed—
144 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/27/22 10:42:42 a.m.
- Watch
The new Leader of the Opposition said just last week that the proposed investments in our affordability plan, which would double the GST tax credit, get dental care for those who cannot afford it and provide direct payments to Canadians having trouble paying the rent, were all akin to printing cash. I guess that was before members of his own party flip-flopped on their position and finally, albeit reluctantly, decided to support our proposed GST tax rebate, which will support 11 million Canadians.
Let us be absolutely clear. The suite of measures in our affordability plan will support Canadians with the rising cost of living without adding fuel to the fire of inflation. Members do not need to take my word for it. The former deputy parliamentary budget officer, Mr. Askari, the University of Calgary's Lindsay Tedds and Alberta economist Trevor Tombe have all pointed out that this support we have proposed to this House will not have an inflationary effect. Why not? It is because it is specific and targeted.
Our plan offers targeted and fiscally responsible financial support to the people who need it most, with particular emphasis on lower-income Canadians, who are most exposed to inflation. Obviously, our ability to spend is limited. That was true when interest rates were at a historic low in 2020, and it is certainly true today.
That is why we continue to act with prudence. Today, we have the lowest net debt and the lowest deficit in the G7. We still have a AAA credit rating. Our goal is to balance fiscal responsibility with the government's responsibility to come to the aid of the most vulnerable Canadians. That has always been our approach.
Thanks to the investments our government has made over the past two years, many of the measures in our affordability plan are already in place to help Canadians.
I would be more than happy to spend the time I have remaining going through the details of our affordability plan and how we will support Canadians through this challenging economic time. However, that is not really what the Conservatives would like to speak about. The Conservative motion, in fact, does not even mention affordability, not once. No, this is a motion against climate action, pure and simple, less than 48 hours after hurricane Fiona touched down in Atlantic Canada.
What the motion from the Leader of the Opposition essentially says is that now is the time to give up in the fight against the climate crisis, although, to be fair, it is not as if my colleagues opposite ever really started. They are still too busy arguing among themselves as to whether climate change is even real.
Climate action is no longer a theoretical political debate; it is an economic necessity. All around the world, governments are investing in a green transition. Our most important trading partners, the United States and the European Union, are all putting serious climate measures into action now.
These are our clients. These are our markets. Without the innovation born out of and encouraged by a robust price on pollution, Canada has no future in the new global economy. Importantly, Canada’s national price on pollution does not make life any less affordable for the vast majority of Canadians. It is unfortunate the Conservative Party continues to spin this false narrative about Canada’s price on pollution while having actually no plan for themselves to tackle climate change.
Once again, the Conservatives are taking aim at the price on pollution. That is not surprising, coming from a party that is still torn over whether climate change is real. Our government sees what is happening, and we are taking action.
Clearly, if the Conservatives were in power, there would be no targets and no talk of achieving net zero. Rather, they would be talking about the oil-based economy and ignoring our vulnerable seniors, low-income workers and struggling families. The Conservatives believe that the federal government should not do anything to tackle the climate crisis or to help Canadians face economic challenges.
Despite our Conservative colleagues' indifference, our government is focusing on making life more affordable for Canadians by urgently investing in a just green transition.
Canadians understand that we must act to stem the climate emergency and reduce our emissions. It is an environmental and economic imperative, and yet the Conservatives continue to attack a policy that is widely recognized as the most efficient means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and drive innovation at the same time.
In fact, last Thursday, the member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes described the federal price on pollution as “some kind of weird Ponzi scheme the government has cooked up.”
For the benefit of my Conservative colleague, I do want to remind the House of the definition of a Ponzi scheme, which is “a fraudulent investing scam promising high rates of return which generates returns for earlier investors with money taken from later investors.”
Putting to one side, for the purposes of this debate, the fact that accusing the government of engaging in fraudulent activities is certainly stretching the boundaries of parliamentary language, that the Conservatives believe that putting a price on pollution is a fraudulent scam is incredibly uninformed and also very telling.
The Conservatives have consistently shirked away from the fight against climate change and this first opposition motion from their new leader shows us that we should just expect more of the same.
Interestingly, though, this motion does not call for an end to the price on pollution, or carbon tax, if members prefer to call it that. The Conservatives now appear to want to keep the carbon tax in place, just not to have it increase.
To be clear, because we have heard a lot of numbers this morning, this price on pollution is going up by 3¢ in April, not tomorrow, not this year but next year.
In fact, this first opposition motion is an attempt to change the channel. It is an attempt to change the channel away from the responsible and the needed affordability plan that we have presented. It is a way to change the channel from the legislation before the House that will provide a tax rebate to Canadians.
The Conservatives are busy lining up speakers on debate. The Conservatives are busy trying to block the passage of our affordability plan, which will put money back into the pockets of Canadians now, not in six months from now, not next year. The affordability plan that we have put forward will put money back into pockets of Canadians now and the Conservatives are blocking it.
As the Conservatives come to grips with the debate and the reality of the climate crisis, our government is committed to and focused on supporting Canadians feeling the effects of global inflation. That is our priority.
1159 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/27/22 10:51:53 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I find it laughable for the member opposite to suggest that the Conservative Party has a concrete plan to fight the climate crisis. She referenced Stephen Harper's government. Under Stephen Harper, our emissions ran wild.
We have put in place a robust and very ambitious target to get to net zero, and we are committed to getting there.
We hope that the Conservatives will not stand in the way.
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/27/22 10:53:05 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the experts I named in my speech all said that our plan to put a price on pollution was the best way of dealing with the increase in greenhouse gas emissions in Canada.
With respect to our goal of achieving net zero, it is certainly a very ambitious goal, and we are proud of it.
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/27/22 10:54:57 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the answer to my colleague's question is yes. If she had read our budget, she would know that is absolutely our priority.
I would appreciate hearing the position of the New Democrats on our price on pollution. I believe they support it and I would like to hear, over the course of the day, what their position is on the increase in the price on pollution that we have proposed for next year.
76 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/27/22 11:31:35 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. It is good to hear the Bloc Québécois praise pollution pricing, the carbon tax, regardless of the fact that the Quebec government went all the way to the Supreme Court to challenge our national plan.
Is the Bloc Québécois ready to admit that we are acting within our jurisdiction and that our carbon tax is a good thing for the provinces that do not have one?
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
