44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 29, 2022 10:00AM
- Sep/29/22 1:36:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands.
I could not be more opposed to this opposition day motion. I am not sure how they could pack more falsehoods into one short motion, but they have certainly done their best.
It is a privilege to rise in the House today to speak to this motion, although I am opposed to it. These past few years have not been easy with the pandemic and its impacts, and now we have the war in Europe and the rising cost of living. It is easy to point fingers and call out for quick solutions, but it is reckless to take advantage of the challenges communities across Canada and the globe are facing.
In recent years, climate change has had unprecedented effects on Canadians. Impacts from climate change are wide ranging, affecting our homes, cost of living, infrastructure, health and safety and economic activity. Of course, we have seen disruptions in our supply chains and how that contributes to inflation right across Canada in all of our communities.
The latest science warns that, to avoid severe impacts of climate change, greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced significantly and urgently to limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5°C. However, in taking action, it is no longer a question of choosing between our economy and climate action. It is well understood that the two go hand in hand and that the long-term health of our people, our planet and our economy depend on our taking ambitious climate action. That is what Canadians want to see. They want to see that from the government, and they want to see that from the opposition parties. They want to see us raising our level of ambition and not backing off and going backward, as the Conservatives would have us do, into the Harper era of inaction.
Let us look at some of the actions that our government is taking. In April 2021, the Government of Canada responded to the latest science by submitting a strengthened national emissions target of 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030, in addition to its goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. In March of this year, the government released the 2030 emissions reduction plan, outlining how Canada will meet our 2030 target. The plan builds on a strong foundation, starting with Canada's first-ever national climate change plan in 2016 and then our strengthened plan, which was released in 2020. I could not be more proud of the work that this government did in consultation with provinces and territories right across the country in order to develop our climate action plan. The plan shows that we can build a cleaner economy while making people's daily lives better.
Carbon pricing is central to all of these plans because it is the most efficient and lowest-cost policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I know members on the opposite side do not believe that carbon pricing is the way to go, but there are many case studies and examples across the world that show it is by far the most effective system for incentivizing the type of behaviour we need to see and the type of innovation we need to see in order to get to a sustainable economy.
We have heard from stakeholders across the country that consistency and predictability are key to unlocking investments in the low-carbon economy. We also know that businesses and industries are developing innovative technologies and approaches to reduce emissions, including carbon capture. There are many other technologies out there. There are many renewable energy projects and things that we can be investing in. They need clear incentives and supports to put those technologies into practice. That is what our government's plan intends to do and is actioning.
Carbon pricing creates those incentives without dictating any particular approach. It lets businesses decide how best to cut their emissions. Let us remember that, if they do not pollute, they do not pay a carbon price.
At the same time, Canadians, especially the most vulnerable Canadians, are facing affordability challenges. We get that. The federal approach to carbon pricing is designed to maintain the consistency demanded by industry and investors while prioritizing affordability for Canadians. We know it is not enough to create a cleaner economy. We have to make sure that Canadians can afford it as well.
It is true that carbon pricing of pollution is modestly increasing fuel costs, by about 2¢ per litre of gasoline this year. We know every bit counts, but carbon pricing has never been about raising revenues or raising prices on Canadians. In fact, under our plan, most households end up with more money in their pocket than they pay.
Wherever federal fuel charge proceeds are returned directly to households, eight out of 10 families get more back through the climate action incentive payments than they pay in direct carbon costs, meaning the system is helping with the cost of living for a majority of Canadian families.
Let us remember, just this July, Canadian families got the first quarterly payment, which was a double payment. In Ontario, they are getting $745 this year, and they got half of that. I noticed that come into my bank account. I am sure many other members of the House and their families noticed that direct quarterly payment from the climate action incentive.
Members on the opposite side cannot claim that those dollars, 90% of those funds, are not going back to Canadian families, because they got those payments in their bank accounts.
It is lower income households that benefit the most. High income households tend to spend a lot more on fuel and energy, so they will face a net cost. However, the lowest income Canadians come out the furthest ahead.
For example, the average cost impact of carbon pricing per household in Alberta is expected to be about $700 in 2022, but this is less than the average climate action incentive payment of about $1,040 per family.
In Ontario, the average household cost is estimated to be about $580, but households will receive back, on average, about $710 to $745. These estimates take into account the direct costs, like paying more for fuel, and also indirect costs, like paying a bit more for goods and services.
Families in rural and small communities are eligible to receive an extra 10%. Households can use these funds however they want. They can use them to absorb the extra 2¢ per litre of gasoline if they choose. Households that take action to reduce their energy use come out even further ahead.
Zero-emissions vehicles are an option, with federal purchase incentives helping reduce the cost. The federal government is also supporting home energy retrofits, through the Canada greener homes grant, to reduce energy used in the home, save money and cut pollution all at the same time.
The Government of Canada has also committed to return proceeds collected from the federal output-based pricing system, or OBPS, to the jurisdictions of origin. Provinces and territories that have voluntarily adopted the OBPS can opt for a direct transfer of proceeds collected. Proceeds collected in other backstop jurisdictions will be returned through the OBPS proceeds fund aimed at supporting clean industrial technologies and clean electricity projects.
Climate change is a serious challenge, but it is also an opportunity, a very big economic opportunity. Canadians want to take advantage of the significant economic opportunities in the low-carbon economy. Analysis by the global commission on the economy and climate estimates that transitioning to a low-carbon economy will deliver a direct economic gain of $26 trillion U.S. and generate 65 million new jobs globally.
Just as we are putting a price on carbon pollution, we are also making historic investments in clean technology, innovation and green infrastructure to drive growth and reduce pollution, including $9.1 billion in new investments to cut pollution and grow the economy as part of the 2030 emissions reduction plan.
The 2030 emissions reduction plan, Canada's next steps to clean air and a strong economy, reflects submissions from over 30,000 Canadians, provinces, territories, indigenous partners, industry, civil society and the independent net-zero advisory body. The plan represents a whole-of-society approach, with practical ways to achieve emissions reductions across all parts of the economy.
Canada is not alone, by any means, in fighting climate change and pricing carbon pollution. Around the world, markets are changing, industries are moving away from products and services that create carbon pollution and are turning to cleaner and more sustainable options. The cost of inaction on climate change is enormous, and it is far greater than the cost of addressing it today.
As emphasized in the most recent IPCC report, the cost of inaction is—
1490 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:47:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what is most disturbing is that the Conservative Party of Canada does not take the climate emergency seriously.
What is interesting is that the Conservatives seem to purport to care about climate change, but put it at odds with the pocketbooks of people. In fact, we have to do both. We have to fight climate change, build a stronger economy and make life more affordable, which is exactly what our government is doing.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:49:09 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not sure how this pertains to the Conservative Party's opposition motion, but I have seen the issues with passports and the backlogs continue to get better based on our minister's willingness and ability to take a lot of real-time feedback, address the concerns. We continue to hire new staff and ensure that the process in passport approvals and processing get better and better. Certainly, we can continue to improve upon that.
I am not sure what the member opposite is referring to with regard to manager's bonuses.
95 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:50:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I take that to be a good faith question. I am not sure of the actual lapse of which the member speaks, but I can assure her that our EI system is a very important part of our social safety net. As we have seen, our government believes in supporting that social safety net.
The Conservatives continue to call it a payroll tax, which it absolutely is not. When we contribute to our pension and we make contributions to employment insurance, those are benefits of which we get to take advantage. They are not a tax in the usual sense of the word.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:51:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from the member, with whom I share a passion for fighting climate change. I appreciate the fact that our government continually needs to raise its ambition. I know the fossil fuel subsidies to which he refers are being phased out, probably not quick enough for the—
53 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
