SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 273

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 1, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 273 - Feb/1/24
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
  • Feb/1/24 4:13:33 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to talk about today's Conservative Party. Today's Conservative Party is not the same political party that was there during the time of Brian Mulroney and Kim Campbell and Joe Clark. It is totally different. In fact, to do a fair comparison of today's Conservative Party, we really need to look south. We need to look at it in terms of the whole MAGA movement that is taking place in the United States and how that movement of sorts is coming into Canada and being ushered in by today's Conservative Party. Canadians need to be aware of that because it is having a real tangible impact on public policy. The best example one can likely talk about is the price on pollution, or the carbon tax versus the carbon rebate. The amount of misinformation that the Conservative Party today is circulating through all forms of communication, in particular through social media, would shame most people, especially leaders of the Progressive Conservative Party from the past. I do not say that lightly at all. If I may, let me read a couple of quotes that I was provided. One is from Joe Clark, former prime minister of Canada and former leader of the Progressive Conservative Party. He is reflecting on today's Conservative Party. He says, “I think it's a party that does not respect the progressive traditions of the Progressive Conservative Party and, consequently, does not reflect the country.... My party is over.” Let us go to Brian Mulroney, again, a former Progressive Conservative prime minister. He said, “I led a Progressive Conservative government. We were very progressive in areas...”. He went on to name a few, and continued, “...we were more conservative” in other areas. He even referenced that he might have at times been more conservative than Stephen Harper. Then he says, “That's the way it should be for a progressive conservative government, but they amputated the progressive part of the name, which is okay, but you shouldn't amputate the part of our heritage and I think that they work better together when both are prominent and Canadians feel more comfortable with it.” He spoke of that progressive side. That is not just hearing it from me as a Liberal. We are talking about former prime ministers of the Progressive Conservative Party who are saying that today's Conservative Party is not a progressive party at all; that the Conservatives have abandoned that aspect of their heritage. The first woman prime minister of Canada was a Progressive Conservative prime minister, Kim Campbell. What does Kim Campbell say about today's Conservative Party? She said, “Well, I've never joined the Conservative Party of Canada. I think Joe Clark expressed it that he didn't leave the party, the party left him. It is not the Progressive Conservative Party, and...our party was the party of the Acid Rain Treaty, the Montreal Protocol.... I'm sorry, I have no time for climate deniers and anybody who is trying to pussyfoot around it.” Today's Conservative Party should not be in any way looked at from the heritage of the Progressive Conservative Party because it has completely gone to the extreme far right. It is, for all intents and purposes, a MAGA Conservative Party here in Canada and that is the style and the approach that the Conservatives are taking. Earlier this week, they came out with their “four priorities”. They have already indicated what their four priorities are going to be in the next election. What is going to be their campaign election platform? It is no surprise that number one is to get rid of the price on pollution. An hon. member: Axe the tax. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, as the member says, to “axe the tax”, as they thump their chest and feel so good about that, the only political party, one of the reasons why they have lost so much respect from Progressive Conservatives. It is a great bumper sticker. They like that bumper sticker. That is the reason why they want to use it. Let me remind people who might be following the debate and the Conservatives who are here listening. They have heard me say, in the past, that in 2021, under the leadership of Erin O'Toole, every one of them campaigned on an election platform that said they favoured a price on pollution. That was only two years ago and they were in favour of a carbon tax, every one of them. How things have changed. There is a special group of 19 Conservatives today who campaigned, as candidates, back in 2008, when Stephen Harper was there. As far as Stephen Harper's campaign literature is concerned, let me read directly from “The True North Strong and Free: Stephen Harper's plan for Canadians”. This is what he says: “A re-elected Conservative Government led by Stephen Harper will implement our Turning the Corner action plan to reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions in absolute terms by 20 per cent over 2006”. It goes on. He supported a price on pollution. There are 19 members here today who campaigned on a price on pollution going as far back as 2008. Interestingly enough, the leader of the Conservative Party today was one of those 19 people. It is hard to imagine what Canadians would think. A word that would come to my mind would be “hypocrisy”. A simple answer would be that they have completely abandoned any sense of a progressive nature to their party. That is the reason why, when they talk about their four priorities, every Canadian needs to be aware of, especially, priority number three. Their priority number three is to cut government expenditures. My constituents and, in fact, Canadians from every region of our nation, love our health care system. They love our child care program and the rolling out of the dental care program. These are all programs that Canadians want to see. One cannot trust the Conservatives with regard to them. They will cut, if history has shown. Even, at times, Progressive Conservatives have cut those programs. Can we imagine what a true Conservative far-right party would actually do? They talk about common sense. Common sense to them is cut, cut, cut. Be aware of a hidden Conservative agenda. That is what I would suggest. The misinformation that they provide to Canadians continues to grow. Again, let us talk about the price on pollution. They will stand up and say, “Do we know what? We are concerned about the impact it is having on the price of inflation on groceries.” They howl from their seats on that issue. They try to give the false impression that it is 6% or 7% or more. Earlier today, there was one member who said 20%, as a direct result on inflation. I do not know where the member gets her math from. At the end of the day, they are trying to create this impression to Canadians that the price on pollution is causing inflation. That is just not true, and the sad thing is that they know it, but it does not prevent them from saying it. It is not just me saying this. The Bank of Canada is recognized around the world as a politically independent agency that has monetary control in good part in terms of the things that are taking place here in Canada. What does the Bank of Canada say in regards to the carbon tax and the impact it has on inflation? Well, the Governor of the Bank of Canada, the man who runs it, says that the “contribution that's making to inflation one year to the next is relatively small. If you want me to put a number on it, it's in the range of 0.15 per cent, so quite small.” Well, we know that the leader of the Conservative Party was saying that he did not like the Governor of the Bank of Canada and that he was going to fire him. At least at one point he was saying that, but I think he might have reversed, and the member for Abbotsford is paying the price for saying that it was a stupid thing for the leader to say that, because now he sits in the far back. However, if members do not want to believe the Bank of Canada, Statistics Canada does a lot of work. We all look at Stats Canada results. Private industry, governments, non-profits rely very heavily on Stats Canada. Stats Canada suggests that “carbon taxes increased the average cost of food by about 0.33 per cent relative to what they would be in the absence of carbon taxes.” That is the entire effect. “Other necessities such as clothing and footwear are approximately 0.2 per cent more expensive due to the carbon tax.” Members do not have to believe me. Look at what the Bank of Canada is saying. Look at what Stats Canada is saying. Contrast that to the disinformation, the intentional misleading information that is funnelled out of the Conservative Party of Canada today. It is disgraceful. That is what I mean by the far right. However, it does not end there. We get member after member stand up and clearly mislead not only their constituents but Canadians as a whole when they say that they are going to axe the carbon tax. However, what they do not mention is the carbon rebate. Over 80% of the constituents I represent, when we take a look at the carbon tax and what they pay into it and compare that to the carbon rebate, or the money they get back, actually get more money in their pocket than is taken out. Again, members do not have to believe me. The Parliamentary Budget Officer, an independent office, is the one who is saying that. Yet, we get the Conservative Party time and time again saying that they are going to cut the carbon tax, that it is more costly for Canadians, and it is just absolutely misleading information. It does not matter to them, because they have their agenda, and we had a sample of that earlier this week when they talked about those four priorities. They want a bumper sticker that says “axe the tax”, and that is what it is all about. They do not care about good, solid public policy. They tell us to look at other countries. I can talk about France, England, Portugal, Norway, Sweden, Mexico and many states in the United States, which all have a price on pollution. Even Ukraine has a price on pollution. Canada is a trading nation— An hon. member: No, it doesn't. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Yes, it does have a price on pollution. An hon. member: At 80¢ a tonne? Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, this is the problem. Maybe there are those in the Conservative Party who do not really look at the notes provided to them by their party. When they do some independent research, they will find that a lot of the stuff they are given is misinformation. However, they purport it to be true. Let us look at Ukraine. The Conservative Party today, for the first time, is going to be voting against a trade agreement on the floor of the House of Commons. Why is that? Even the New Democrats are voting in favour of the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement. I believe the Green Party and the Bloc Party are also doing so. It is only the Conservative Party. They come up with this red herring that they are voting against it because it has the words “carbon tax”, or it is dealing with a price on pollution, and they do not want that in a trade agreement. Well, duh. Ukraine has had a price on pollution since 2011. Can we imagine this? The President of Ukraine came to Canada, at a time of war in Europe, to sign off on an agreement that is beneficial to Ukraine, Canada and, ultimately, many others, and the Conservatives have chosen to vote against it. It brings us back to the question of why. I believe the price on pollution is a bit of a red herring for them on this, and it has a lot more to do with their current leader wanting to imitate Donald Trump. The Conservative leader and his MAGA politics are very real. As we get closer to an election, Canadians are going to become much more aware of the Conservative agenda, even the hidden aspects of it. We recognize the importance of trade. Earlier, when making comments, a Conservative member talked about how foreign investment is down. How can Conservatives justify giving false information on foreign investment? If we look at last year, with respect to dollars of investment on a per capita basis, no other country in the world received more foreign investment than Canada did. However, Conservatives go around giving a false impression and have no problem doing it. I can provide proof of the comments I have made on the record in the last 19 or so minutes, but Conservative members will still stand up and say the absolute opposite. For me, it creates a number of ethical issues that I will not necessarily get to talk about. What blew my mind earlier today in question period was when the Minister of Housing said that Jenni Byrne, who is the campaign manager and former girlfriend of the Leader of the Conservative Party, is now an active lobbyist for Loblaws. I hope Conservatives will ask me a question on that. I would be happy to expand on the bizarreness of that issue.
2338 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border