44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 29, 2023 11:00AM
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to this Senate bill.
First, I would just like to point out that the Conservative member who spoke earlier talked about how much the Conservatives support the bill. Of course, they could really show that support by ensuring that it receives speedy passage to move on to the next stage, instead of prolonging debate on the matter.
Canada's built environment is a significant contributor to GHG emissions, with more than 25% of GHGs coming from the construction, use and maintenance of residential, commercial and institutional buildings. The embodied carbon is the GHG emission arising from the manufacturing, transportation, installation, maintenance and disposal of building materials from building construction. It is responsible for 10% of all energy-related emissions.
In 2019, the World Green Building Council called for a 40% reduction in embodied carbon by 2030. To ensure that Canada meets its GHG reduction commitments, both energy use and carbon emissions need to be reduced simultaneously. This bill puts into law that, for most federal construction, GHG reduction must be a part of the planning process. It is the smart thing to do, and it is the right thing to do. Currently, this is only an internal federal policy.
Wood is one of the best materials for reducing the carbon footprint in buildings. The low embodied carbon of wood products stems from the fact that the manufacturing process is not energy-intensive, because it relies predominantly on electricity and uses long-lasting forest products that have sequestered carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Great advances have been made in tall wood construction. It is now possible to build more buildings in a safe, ecologically sensitive way than in past construction. These new technologies offer an obvious opportunity to increase the use of wood in building and thus support the forest sector in Canada, which has been beset by difficulties caused by American tariffs through the softwood lumber dispute, the pine beetle epidemic in British Columbia, catastrophic forest fires and reduced fibre supply because of past harvests.
As the largest producer in Canada, the federal government could give this sector a much-needed boost by using this cutting-edge technology at home. If passed, this bill would require the Department of Public Works to consider any potential reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and any other environmental benefits when developing requirements for the construction, maintenance and repair of federal buildings.
In 2009, B.C. passed the Wood First Act, which aims to “facilitate a culture of wood by requiring the use of wood as the primary building material in all new provincially funded buildings”. In 2013, Quebec adopted the Wood Charter, which requires all builders working on projects financed in whole or in part by the provincial government to consider wood in their construction plans; it also requires project managers to prove that they have calculated the greenhouse gas emissions of wood versus other materials in the pre-project stage.
Different versions of this private member's bill were introduced in past Parliaments, and they were supported by the NDP. Early versions of the bill explicitly asked the minister to consider using wood. However, that text was amended in the 42nd Parliament to direct the minister to consider any reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and any other environmental benefits instead; it may also allow the use of wood or any other thing, including a material, product or sustainable resource that achieves such benefits.
That bill, Bill C-354 passed in the House but died in the Senate at the end of that Parliament. It was introduced as a Senate bill in this Parliament. This version of the private member's bill is inspired by new developments in wood construction technology. Large buildings constructed with mass timber can be built quickly. They are also cost-competitive, and they meet fire safety requirements.
Advances in wood construction technology have demonstrated that large buildings and other infrastructures can be built with wood. Recently, the University of British Columbia constructed the Brock Commons student residence; it is the world's tallest wood building, at 18 storeys. Toronto's George Brown College is currently building Limberlost Place, a 10-storey mass timber structure, at its Waterfront Campus; this will be the first institutional building of its kind in Ontario.
In 2014, the Cree community of Mistissini, Quebec, opened the Mistissini Bridge, a 160-metre-long bridge with semicontinuous arches made of glue-laminated wood beams. It is one of the largest wooden structures in Canada, and it won two national awards at the 2016 Canadian Consulting Engineering Awards.
Canadian companies lead the mass timber sector in North America, with production plants in B.C., Ontario and Quebec. Because wood has lower embodied carbon than most building materials do, this bill offers us the opportunity to support innovation in the forestry sector while, at the same time, helping the Government of Canada to meet its GHG emission reduction targets. This is especially the case in these difficult times, because the sector faces large duties from the U.S.
Given the developments in the technology, this idea is one that is being used more and more around the world. It makes sense to use this technology more at home. In budget 2017, the government provided Natural Resources Canada with $39.8 million over four years, starting in 2018-19, to support projects and activities that increase the use of wood as a greener substitute material in infrastructure projects.
Bringing this forward is our way to call on the government to continue to support this activity through government procurement. It is time for us to move forward. This bill has been around and through the block a number of times. I repeat, as I stated at the beginning of my speech, that if the Conservatives say they support moving forward with this bill, then they should show it with actions and stop the delaying tactics. Let us get on with it, get it done, support the industry and do what is good for the environment. That is the path forward.
1020 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:00:53 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, the carbon tax is an absolute failure. I have a two-part question.
Could the member address how the carbon tax is an absolute failure and how it has failed to reduce emissions?
We, as Conservatives, have significant concerns regarding the amendments passed in the Senate. There are 24 different amendments, 11 of which make the bill significantly worse.
After five years of consultation, how can this be drawn out further? Can he speak directly to the Liberal flip-flop causing the bill to collapse?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:01:30 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, we just have to look at the facts. After eight years of the Liberal government, people pay more taxes and we still have more pollution. These are the facts. This is why the Liberal carbon tax does not work.
41 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:47:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, NDP-Liberal tax hikes make life cost more for struggling Canadians. The first carbon tax makes everything more expensive, and it fuels inflation, so most Canadians are paying more than they will ever get back. The second carbon tax will add over $1,100 more per household, and there is no fake rebate scheme for that one.
Combined, that is almost $4,000 in new taxes per Alberta family, and it hurts low-income Canadians the most. When will the costly coalition axe the carbon taxes so Canadians can afford gas, groceries and home heating?
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:57:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, carbon tax 1 and 2 would hammer Atlantic Canadians, with it ranging from $2,081 in P.E.I. to $2,166 in my home province.
Atlantic premiers, including the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, begged the Prime Minister to not put carbon tax on home heating fuel. Their request fell on deaf ears.
Now these premiers, including Premier Furey, ask the environment minister to not implement carbon tax 2. Will the Liberal government stop trampling over the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and axe this useless carbon tax?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:58:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there they go again with that unbelievable guilt trip. The Jacobs brothers from Fogo Island and fishermen like them who take to the ocean in Canada's most dangerous profession are going to be hammered when a carbon tax is placed on the very fuel that they need to feed their families. Will the current government that knows its carbon tax is a failure axe this useless carbon tax and stop trampling on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?
81 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 4:56:40 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for representing the views of his constituents in this place. He is an elected member of Parliament. He gets to reflect those views. Despite what other parties may think is indignation and may say to impose indignation on his comments, I want to ask the hon. member what his constituents' views are with respect to the carbon tax itself.
68 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 5:19:19 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, the member's last comment talked about the health and wellness of Canadians. I wonder if he would consider the impact of the carbon tax, which is adding thousands of dollars to Canadians' cost of living and fuel costs. It has an impact.
I just want to make a quick comment also that in British Columbia we had something called “AirCare”, which tested vehicles for about two decades. Then it was scrapped because the pollutants from vehicles were reduced so dramatically. I just wonder why the focus is not on technology, as opposed to taxes, which have failed. The Liberals have not yet met any of their climate objectives.
113 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 5:20:12 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, the question was about carbon pricing, which is not directly related to CEPA, but I am happy to talk about it.
I would point out that in the great province of my colleague opposite who asked the question, there is no federal backstop program because there is a provincial government that prices carbon, and always has. If I am not mistaken, that was an action by the previous Liberal government in British Columbia. I know there are some members on the Conservative side who sat in that government at the time. Perhaps he knows one of the members opposite who sat in that Liberal government. I know the Liberals in B.C. might have more in common sometimes with some of the members of the Conservative Party here.
Carbon pricing works. That is a truth. That is something the Conservatives universally felt, just a little over a year ago, when they all ran on a promise to implement a carbon price in Canada, but they have had an about-face. The new leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Carleton, does not believe in carbon pricing. At a recent Conservative convention, there was a question as to whether or not climate change exists and it was a pretty tight vote. I do not recall exactly what the breakdown was, but it seems that most Conservative members are still on the fence as to whether or not climate change exists.
However, what is irrefutable is that carbon pricing works. I am grateful for the leadership of British Columbia and the aforementioned Liberal government there that instituted that and proved, decades ago, that carbon pricing is effective at reducing our emissions.
282 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:09:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the government is introducing a carbon tax on heat, gas and groceries. Will the government also apply the HST and GST on the tax?
26 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:09:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I am glad to hear the Leader of the Opposition talk about a price on carbon, because that is a key element of our government's efforts to fight climate change—
34 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:10:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, will the government charge HST on the carbon tax, yes or no?
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:10:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, does that include charging HST on the carbon tax, a tax on a tax, yes or no?
19 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:10:32 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the point is, does the government plan to tax the tax? Will the HST apply to the carbon tax, yes or no?
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:11:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, that is false.
We will assume that she intends to tax the tax. That means that Canadians will pay once with the carbon tax and then twice for the tax on the tax. What will be the full cost of the carbon tax per litre be once the tax, and the tax on the tax, are fully implemented? How much will it be?
65 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:11:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the question was this: How much will it be per litre once the carbon tax is fully implemented? How much?
22 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:12:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, it is funny that the United States does not have a carbon tax. It is even funnier that she thinks the bankers are happy. I am sure they are happy. They do not mind paying what turns out to be 41¢ a litre when this carbon tax is fully implemented.
How much will that cap cost, net, for the average family?
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:13:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, she has a tax plan and she cannot even tell us how much it will cost. We know it will be 41¢ a litre for the first carbon tax.
How much will it cost the average family in higher heat, gas and grocery bills? How much?
49 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:14:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I would like to remind the Conservative leader of what he and everyone sitting beside him said when they asked Canadians for their vote in the last election: “We will assess progress [so] carbon prices [can be] on a path to $170/tonne”.
Are they disavowing that?
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 7:14:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I never supported such a thing so, of course, I do not need to disavow it.
The question was this: The minister plans a second carbon tax. How much will that tax add to the price of a litre of gas? How much?
45 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
