SoVote

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 10:09:47 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have four petitions to present today. The first one specifically calls to the attention that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b), protects freedom of thought, belief and opinion. It further goes on to discuss how the Canadian Bill of Rights, section 1, protects the rights of individual life, liberty and personal security, and enjoyment of property. The undersigned members of my community are calling on the Prime Minister and Minister of Justice to protect Canadians' right to advocate without fear of reprisal for Palestinians to live in peace and security.

97 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 10:10:31 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the second petition actually had good news, because the government announced measures with respect to it towards the end of last year. This petition specifically talks about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and says that we have been warned repeatedly that rising temperatures over the next two decades will bring widespread devastation and extreme weather, that addressing climate change requires a drastic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and that, in 2021, the federal government committed to cap and cut emissions from the oil and gas sector to achieve net zero by 2050. The petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to move forward immediately with bold emissions caps for the oil and gas sector that are comprehensive in scope and realistic in achieving the necessary targets that Canada has. Mr. Speaker, I have presented a lot of petitions in my day. I have never had the Leader of the Opposition or the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman heckle me while doing that. I will just jump straight to the petition.

175 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 10:11:34 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this petition is meant for the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman. This comes— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

23 words

The Speaker

Feb/1/24 10:11:40 a.m.
Watch

I will ask the hon. member to rephrase his statement so that we could just talk about the subject of the petition. As members know, the Speaker has made a ruling in this respect, not to make comments about where these have come from. Will the hon. member please withdraw his comment?

52 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Feb/1/24 10:12:08 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the comment singling out the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman. This petition calls on all members of Parliament. It states that, back in September 2022—

32 words

Mr. Bob Zimmer

Feb/1/24 10:12:48 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order with respect to consistency. The member just did again what you asked him to withdraw about a minute before. This was a big deal this week with my colleague from Battle River—Crowfoot. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, you made me apologize for doing something similar; you are not being consistent. This has been the accusation all along. You pick your battles, and we lose most of them, Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals are allowed to just keep doing what they are doing. I wish you would be consistent, Mr. Speaker.

99 words

The Speaker

Feb/1/24 10:13:45 a.m.
Watch

I would like to thank the hon. member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies for raising this point. Indeed, as the Chair had made clear in a ruling late on Monday, the idea is an apology and a withdrawal. Members are first asked to withdraw a comment, and that opportunity was offered to the member for Battle River—Crowfoot. It went to a second round, involving an apology and a withdrawal. I asked the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands to withdraw the comment, and he did. If he had— Some hon. members: And then he did it again.

105 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Feb/1/24 10:15:01 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-57

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just so there is no ambiguity on this, I apologize and withdraw that comment. Now, what I was saying was that this petition specifically calls on all members of Parliament to immediately and swiftly enact Bill C-57, which would put into law the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement. This would assist Ukraine in rebuilding after it defeats the illegal invasion of Vladimir Putin. It actually says in the petition that misinformation regarding the effect of Canada's carbon pricing scheme on this agreement has been widely debunked. The petition states, therefore, that the undersigned citizens of Canada call upon the House of Commons and all parliamentarians to reaffirm our unwavering commitment to Ukraine by swiftly adopting the updated free trade agreement.

126 words

The Speaker

Feb/1/24 10:15:01 a.m.
Watch

Members will forgive me if I review Hansard to see if that is the case. I was occupied with another issue. However, I am glad that the member for Kingston and the Islands withdrew the comment. We do not want disorder in this House. I hope, given the current controversy, that he will stay far away from causing disorder.

59 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 10:15:57 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the last petition that I have today comes specifically from members of the Nexus and Bayridge Secondary School community in my riding. The petitioners are calling upon the Minister of Finance; the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development; and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to prioritize a national school food program through budget 2024 for implementation by the fall of 2024. As petitioners specifically draw to the attention of the government and the House, Statistics Canada indicates that one in four children in Canada lives in a food-insecure household— An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is heckling me. I am just trying to present this on behalf of my constituents. Finally, the petitioners state that school food programs are recognized around the world as essential to the health, well-being and education of students, with over 388 million children in at least 168 countries receiving free and subsidized school meals. I really want to thank the community at Bayridge Secondary School in my riding of Kingston and the Islands for—

187 words

The Speaker

Feb/1/24 10:17:07 a.m.
Watch

The member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies is rising on a point of order, but he is not in his seat. I will just give him a bit of time to go to his seat.

39 words

Mr. Bob Zimmer

Feb/1/24 10:17:23 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, a bit of the ruling yesterday was with respect to how long these were taking, and we were told that there are tight rules about how petitions should be presented in this House. We were not to mention members, and it was supposed to be a brief statement, which I had brought to you, Mr. Speaker. Where is the brief statement in this case? Again, we are seeking consistency. I wish you, Mr. Speaker, would be consistent in this case.

82 words

The Speaker

Feb/1/24 10:17:53 a.m.
Watch

I thank the hon. member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies. What was also mentioned in that ruling is that, although the Standing Orders have been very clear about terms, if we were to strictly interpret that, it has been the habit of this House through all Chairs and people who have assumed the presidency here to allow a bit of latitude in terms of the length. However, we ask members not to offer opinions as to whether they agree, but just present the points of view of the petitioners to the House. The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

104 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Feb/1/24 10:18:42 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion to that petition, I was just saying that I wanted to thank the incredible school community of Bayridge Secondary School in Kingston for its advocacy on this issue and for using its voice in Parliament.

39 words

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Feb/1/24 10:19:03 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise here today on the traditional territories of the Algonquin Anishinabe nation. To them, we say “meegwetch”. I am presenting a petition that speaks to an issue that has seized this House in a number of different ways in terms of pending legislation. The petitioners are asking the government to take account of the degradation of Canada's waterways and watersheds. The current laws do not adequately protect Canada's waterways and watersheds from irresponsible industrial practice. The petitioners call on Canada to update our water laws to ensure that no industry or single corporation can take precedence over the health of Canada's waterways and watersheds and, by extension, over the health of the people of Canada and the very species that also rely on the health of these waterways. We must ensure that Canada's water laws are updated under the guidance of professionals and specialists in the field of water conservation.

162 words

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

Feb/1/24 10:20:19 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time. The Speaker: Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

24 words

Stand

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC)

Feb/1/24 10:21:00 a.m.
Watch

moved: That, given that the carbon tax has proven to be a tax plan, not an environmental plan, the House call on the Liberal government to cancel the April 1, 2024, carbon tax increase. He said: Mr. Speaker, after eight years in office, this Prime Minister is not worth the cost. That is why Canada needs a common-sense government that will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop crime. After eight years, the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. That is why we need a common-sense Conservative government that will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Today, I rise on the first of those Conservative priorities. I think members across the way are becoming more and more convinced that we might be onto something with this four-point plan to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Why do we want to axe the tax? Let me start with yesterday's debate with the Prime Minister. I highlighted, once again, the Medeiros family farm. It produces mushrooms for all the city of Ottawa but has been facing tens of thousands of dollars in monthly carbon tax bills alone. Now, the Prime Minister claimed that I told the farm to stand on its own two feet when it was trying to bring natural gas to the farm and that I could not possibly understand what he was referring to because, of course, I helped the farm. I dug up the quote, and I said, in response to high energy prices, that the goal was “to find a commercially viable way that this kind of...project”, natural gas for farms, “can stand on its own two feet, pay for itself and create some jobs”. From that moment, I went to Enbridge, which, being a large multinational pipeline company, had been hard for an individual farmer to contact on the phone. I got the executives on the phone. I told them the pipeline was needed to take gas to the mushroom farm in order to generate the steam and the other power that is needed to produce mushrooms. Ultimately, the project got done without any tax dollars and paid for itself, because natural gas is significantly cheaper and less polluting than propane and oil. That is an example of how we can do great things for our farm families without costing Canadian taxpayers money and without creating new federal bureaucracy. The Prime Minister's comments do speak to his patronizing view of all Canadians. He believes that Canadians can never stand on their own two feet. In fact, the only reason Canadians are struggling to do so is that he is on their backs. It is like the Canadian people are carrying a backpack, and he comes along and asks: “Can I help you with that? It looks heavy.” He puts the backpack on his shoulders, and then he piggybacks on the Canadian who was carrying it in the first place. Now, they are not only carrying the bag but also carrying him. In this case, the analogy refers to his carbon tax. That same family farm, which was thriving through intelligent investments, including in natural gas that he and his radical environment minister want to eliminate, was thriving and employing dozens of people in our community. Now, it is paying carbon taxes of $10,000 to $20,000 per month, an amount the Prime Minister wants to quadruple to 61¢ a litre and place an equivalent charge on natural gas. On April 1, the Prime Minister, with the full support of the NDP, intends to raise the carbon tax by 23%. This is at a time when Canadians cannot afford to eat. Moments ago, the Prime Minister had one of his parliamentary secretaries, the member for Kingston and the Islands, get up and say that one in four school children is not able to eat. That is quite an admission by a government that has been in power for eight years. It used it as a justification to create a new federal bureaucracy. The Liberals say that it is a school food program, except there is no food in the program. In fact, it is not even in the schools; it is in Ottawa. In downtown Ottawa, the Liberals propose to create a series of meetings, bureaucracies and organizations that will collect yet more money from the rest of the population in order to talk about creating agreements and frameworks for discussions and consultations about an eventual program that supposedly will feed the one in four kids who is hungry because the government is taxing their food. Why not skip all those steps and just stop taxing the food? Like everything the Prime Minister does, he doubles housing costs, and then he says we need a new government housing program. He doubles the number of shootings in Canada with his catch-and-release policies, and then he says we need new government programs to combat the gun violence the government unleashed with its Criminal Code changes. He causes these problems, and then the problems he causes are a pretext for him to have more power and more money. We all know that the Prime Minister is not the solution. He is the problem. The last thing we need is to take more money from our working-class families, our farmers and our seniors and to put it in his hands. We stand in the House of Commons as the only party that opposes the carbon tax hike. The NDP has betrayed working-class people in places like Vancouver Island, northern British Columbia and northern Ontario where its constituents rely on pickup trucks, where the rural people and the farmers use energy to power their combines, their tractors, their farm drying equipment and their barns. The NDP raises taxes on all those people. The NDP wants to shut down Canada's resource sector. Just the other day, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie cheered at the prospect of shutting down the entire natural gas economy, which would devastate the people in the NDP riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley. What we have is a radical agenda by the Prime Minister and his NDP allies, coalition partners, to quadruple the carbon tax to 61¢ a litre, all while shutting down our resource sector so that we can import from dirty dictatorships. What we have from the Prime Minister is a pro-Russia energy policy that shuts down our energy industry to give more and more business to power Putin's war machine. All of that is supported by the NDP. These facts build a firm and final case that only common-sense Conservatives stand on the side of working-class people, who need their pickup trucks to do their jobs and to build the country; seniors, who need to heat their homes in Edmonton in -50°C weather; single mothers, who are putting water in their children's milk because the cost of produce has risen under the Liberal-NDP carbon tax; children, one in four of whom, by the government's own admission today, are going hungry in our schools. This is the misery that Canadians are living after eight years of the Prime Minister. The definition of insanity is when one does the same thing over and over again and expects a different result. Raising taxes and shutting down industries has sent two million people to the food bank. It has doubled housing costs. It has led to homeless encampments that we never had before in cities across this country. There are 30 homeless encampments in Halifax alone. There is the re-emergence of illnesses that were long ago banished, like scurvy, because people have become malnourished under the Prime Minister's impoverishing policies. We, as common-sense Conservatives, will undo this damage. We will axe the tax to lower the cost of gas, heat and groceries so that our seniors can heat their homes, and our families can feed their kids. Our farmers can, once again, repatriate production of food to this country and can use the best environmental stewardship on planet earth. Our energy and resource companies can harvest the cornucopia of bounty that our country has beneath its feet and can use those resources to lift the world out of poverty in the most environmentally friendly way that could possibly be imagined. We are the best. Our workers are the best. Our inventors are the best. Our businesses are the best. If we could get the government out of the way, then we could have the best. We will have that, and we will do it not by big powerful government dictating from on high, but we will do it by the great Canadian people standing on their own two feet and by the common sense of the common people united for our common home: their home, my home, our home. Let us bring it home.

1518 words

Taxpayers

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Feb/1/24 10:31:14 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives make it sound like using tax policies to fight climate change is never a good idea. We disagree with some of the measures the Liberals have in place because we think they are unnecessary. I am talking about measures like the tax credit for carbon capture, utilization and storage, the clean tech tax credit and the hydrogen tax credit. I would like the member for Carleton to tell us about his vision for these tax credits. Do they actually work, or does using tax policy to fight climate change only work when the money does not end up lining the pockets of oil companies?

108 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Feb/1/24 10:31:54 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, first of all, we are not lining any industry's pockets. Furthermore, our energy industry is capable of increasing its own revenues in a free market. It is the barriers put in place by the Liberal government that prevent these companies from doing business properly. It is not that we do not want to subsidize anything. Rather, we want to allow free enterprise. When it comes to green energy, we have to green-light green projects. We have to green-light hydroelectric dams in Quebec, not tie them up for years, as the federal government wants to do with the Bloc Québécois's support. We are the ones who want to allow lithium, cobalt and graphite mines to open quickly, within 18 months instead of 18 years, so we can produce electric batteries here in Canada. We are the ones who want to allow nuclear energy that will provide zero-emission electricity. We are going to green-light green projects.

166 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 10:33:03 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, last week the Leader of the Opposition referred to two Quebec mayors as being incompetent. I wonder whether he has had an opportunity to reflect on that and whether he still feels that way, or whether he would like to apologize for having called two mayors in Quebec incompetent.

51 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 273