SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Mar/20/23 3:15:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, public transit is in crisis. Municipalities like mine are being forced to raise fares while in some cases simultaneously cutting service due to a lack of investment from higher orders of government. Groups across the country, from Environmental Defence to the Canadian Urban Transit Association, are sounding the alarm, warning that transit systems are at risk of falling into a death spiral without critical operational support. Will the minister ensure not only capital funding in budget 2023, but also the critical operating support being called for across the country?

91 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Mar/20/23 6:35:20 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the chance to come back to the question I asked, after I returned from the most recent UN climate negotiations, on the fact that a credible climate plan must include plans to phase out oil and gas while supporting affected workers. Today feels particularly appropriate to do so, given that international climate scientists have shared their most recent report, one that speaks to this being our last chance before the climate crisis becomes irreversible, and this being their last report before the goal to limit warming to 1.5°C is out of reach. Here is the crux of it for Canada: If we want even a 50% chance of staying under 1.5°C in global average temperature rise, and if we were to do our fair share, then 86% of Canada’s proven fossil fuel reserves need to remain unextracted. It is a tall challenge, particularly for a country that has chosen to be so dependent on oil, but we can and should rise to it. While the federal government is not turning a blind eye to this crisis, as carbon pricing is an example of an important measure that it has moved ahead with, in the words of Bill McKibben on climate, “Winning slowly is the same as losing”. For every positive measure, like putting a price on pollution, the government also continues to placate the oil and gas industry as if the science did not apply to it. It has been busy approving oil exploration permits off the coast of Newfoundland, looking for more oil, when we know that we need to leave the majority of our proven reserves untouched if we want a shot at rising to this crisis. The government also brags about billions of dollars of investment in climate action, and we will no doubt hear this in the parliamentary secretary’s remarks tonight, I expect, but so much of this so-called investment is in fact more subsidies to the very sector most responsible for the crisis, for example, in the form of a tax credit for a failed climate solution, so-called carbon capture and storage. In my original question, I asked if this government was going to continue to hide behind the greed of the oil and gas industry. In the months since, it has only gotten worse. While it continues to push the federal government to give them billions, and last year’s budget, for example, set aside $8.6 billion of our money for the fairy tale known as carbon capture, the oil and gas industry continues to rake in record profits. The sixth-largest oil and gas company operating in Canada booked pure profit of more than $35 billion dollars last year. These are the same companies that lied to us for decades about the climate crisis they helped cause. In recent weeks, these companies have been telling Canadians and their MPs that they need more of our money to increase the carbon capture tax credit, money that could be invested in workers’ livelihoods. If we are going to be honest, we do not need more of that. What we need is a federal government willing to be clear with Canadians about this crisis and the urgent action required to address it. We could unite Canadians around this, investing in workers’ livelihoods, in deeply affordable public transit and high-speed rail, in a zero-emissions electricity grid and in deep energy retrofits of buildings across the country, which would create well-paid, high-skill jobs and would return to public coffers $2 to $5 for every dollar spent. My question for the parliamentary secretary, who I appreciate is here with us this evening, is this: Will she advocate in her caucus for these transformational investments, in place of more subsidies to the oil and gas industry, while the window of opportunity is still open?

660 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Mike Morrice

Mar/20/23 6:43:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I do not dispute for a second some of the investments that the federal government is making. However, the reality is that by giving the oil and gas industry, for example, upwards of $20 billion a year, those investments work at cross-purposes with what the parliamentary secretary just spoke about. They feed the lines of the opposition when they attack the carbon price. More importantly, the investments are insufficient to respond to the climate crisis in the closing window of opportunity we have. Again, will the parliamentary secretary stand up to end the subsidies to oil and gas? If we want a truly renewable grid, according to the Green Budget Coalition, it would take about $17 billion to do it, which is less than we currently give the oil and gas industry every single year.

138 words