SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 266 - Dec/12/23

Dec/12/23 12:14:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question, and that is the reason I would reference a pattern. What we have actually seen is that the Conservative Party of today is not the same Conservative Party even of Stephen Harper. Under the current leadership, it continues to move farther to the right. The MAGA right is very real. It is a movement that is in the United States, and it is coming north. The one who is selling it the most today is the leader of the Conservative Party, and the price on pollution is an excellent example of that. A bunch of Conservatives travel the country saying that they are going to get rid of the price on pollution and make things more affordable; in fact, it is just not true. A vast majority of Canadians would actually have less disposable income as a direct result of the Conservatives' policy, yet they would not know that from what they are being told by the Conservative movement today. Canadians need to be made aware of it. American-style politics is coming north through the leader of the official opposition.

187 words

Harper
Maga

Context: House Hansard - 266 - Dec/12/23

Hon. Joyce Murray (Vancouver Quadra, Lib.)

Dec/12/23 2:10:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, our government is continuing to invest in affordable housing. In 2017, our Prime Minister launched a badly needed $80-billion national housing strategy to fill the big gaps left by the previous Conservative government's denial of federal responsibility for housing. Countless Canadians remember what life was like during Prime Minister Harper's “decade of darkness”. Last week showed that today's Conservative leader is cut from the same cloth. On Thursday and Friday, Conservative MPs voted against funding indigenous housing, funding 15,000 permanent affordable homes, constructing 71,000 rental homes and so much more. Our government is working to strengthen the economy by supporting the middle class and those seeking to join it. While in Mr. Harper's cabinet, today's Conservative leader worked to undermine Canada's electoral democracy and shred our social safety net. The Conservative leader is simply not worth the risk.

151 words

Context: House Hansard - 266 - Dec/12/23

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson (Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, Lib.)

Dec/12/23 2:45:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, when this government came into power after 10 years of Stephen Harper and the member for Carleton, emissions in this country were projected to go up by 15% versus 2005 levels by 2030. Last week, we released the emissions reduction plan update for Canada. It shows that we have far exceeded the Harper target. We raised the target. We will achieve the interim objective in 2026. We will achieve the 2030 objective of a 40% reduction. We have a climate plan that is working. Where is his climate plan?

91 words

Context: House Hansard - 266 - Dec/12/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Dec/12/23 6:50:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would tell the member that the Government of Canada has supported and continues to support our farmers in many, many different ways. The member started off his comments by saying that the Liberal Party is out of touch. Nothing could be farther from the truth. If the member and the Conservative Party would only take a look in the mirror, we could talk about being out of touch. Listen to what Canadians have to say about things like the climate and our environment. Listen to what it is they have to say about the type of behaviour they are seeing more and more of every day. What we are witnessing inside the chamber, which I talked about earlier this morning, is a pattern coming out of the Conservative Party. The member himself spoke about it, the issue of deception. For example, the leader of the Conservative Party has been travelling the country, telling Canadians that he is going to get rid of the price on pollution, thereby making life more affordable. That is just not true. It would not make life more affordable. In fact, it would put less disposable income into the pockets of a vast majority of Canadians. On the one hand, he is saying that it would make life more affordable, but on the other hand, in reality, it would not. What does that remind people of? It reminds me of Donald Trump and MAGA politics that are creeping in from the south, using the leader of the official opposition's office in order to be able to bring in that style of politics. The member opposite just stood up and is saying that regular gas and diesel were impacted by the carbon tax for farmers. Is it applied? An hon. member: In some cases it is. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, they do not qualify that, because that does not fit their agenda. That is what I mean in terms of misleading. What we have witnessed is a Conservative Party today that is more concerned about bumper-sticker politics than it is about good, solid, public policy. Just over two years ago, every member, including the one who just spoke, actually had an election platform that said that, if they were elected, they would have a price on pollution. They said it in each of the 338 constituencies from coast to coast to coast. A new leader came in, and they did a flip-flop and started spreading misinformation. That is the type of leadership we have seen within the Conservative Party today. We got a little hint of that when the person who just finished speaking tried to give the impression that we, as a government, are not there to support farmers. I was in opposition when Stephen Harper gave it to farmers by getting rid of the Canadian Wheat Board. Members are applauding now, but he denied them the legislative right to have a referendum on the Canadian Wheat Board. He did not think twice about getting rid of it. What about the piles of wet grain that sat on the Prairies as boats could not get into Vancouver? Where were the prairie members of Parliament then? Were they standing up for the farmers there and for the Harper government to actually stand by the laws of Canada and allow a referendum on the Canadian Wheat Board? Instead, they ditched it on their own personal political agenda. They do not stand up—

582 words

Context: House Hansard - 266 - Dec/12/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Dec/12/23 7:00:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would not agree with the member's conclusions; again, he tries to imply misinformation. It is just not true that the Government of Canada does not support farmers. We can go back to the days when I was an opposition member; I just made reference to the Canadian Wheat Board, and I was on Main Street, by Portage Avenue. I can tell the member that there were hundreds of farmers out there, furious with the Stephen Harper government. They believed the government was destroying the industry and, at least in part, many of those farming industries. We are always going to find that the Liberal government as a whole has been and continues to be exceptionally supportive of farming and rural communities. This can be found through a wide variety of measures, whether it is budgetary motions or the expansion of international trade. No government has signed off on more trade agreements than the current government has; this has enhanced all sorts of opportunities for farmers. We will find that, on agricultural products, a good percentage is actually exported outside Canada. A good example of that is the hog industry; in the province of Manitoba, that industry is doing exceptionally well. There are certain industries within our rural communities that we could give more attention to, and the government will continue to do so. What I find somewhat sad is that the Conservative Party of Canada is trying to utilize the farming community, as they are doing with indigenous communities now, to try to win the battle of getting rid of the price on pollution. The Conservative Party needs to wake up and realize that it is only the Conservative Party of Canada that seems to want to deny that sensible approach for dealing with climate change. The world is moving towards recognizing climate change and bringing in progressive policies, such as the price on pollution. We have to take into consideration individuals such as Dawn. When she talks about interest rates and the impact of carbon pricing, we need to listen. Where the government is in a position to take action, I believe it is doing just that. However, to use farmers such as Dawn as a political tool to get rid of the price on pollution generally is wrong.

384 words