44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 2, 2024 10:00AM
- Feb/2/24 10:29:22 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let me begin by quoting a former colleague of mine, who said, “Ukraine is defending itself against unjustified aggression — the Kremlin’s naked attempt to destroy a country’s statehood, infrastructure & identity.
“Full collective support for Ukraine’s victory is the right legal, moral...military & strategic course of action.”
I strongly support this position. Putin's war of aggression is not just against Ukraine. His war machine attempts to undermine the western consensus for democracy, the rule of law and the pursuit of a quality of opportunity.
I will move now to Canada's role in this fight and the substance of this bill. This bill proposes updates to Canada's existing free trade agreement with Ukraine. I support free trade with Ukraine. I do not support every measure in this bill. I take particular issue with the Liberals' inclusion of a carbon tax within the text. That is because, in the Canadian context, the Liberal carbon tax has dramatically increased the cost of living for every single one of the people I represent, all while failing to bring Canada anywhere close to meeting its emissions targets. It is not solving the urgent question of climate change. It is a clearly flawed policy that creates economic harm, and those who adhere to ideology without questions put up roadblocks that have stifled the policy innovation needed to reduce emissions.
I can simultaneously hold the position that I support free trade with Ukraine and the victory of Ukraine over Putin while I oppose a carbon tax. There are tens of millions of other Canadians who feel the exact same way. For the Liberals, the NDP, the Bloc or anyone else to suggest that to develop ways for Canada to support Ukraine I need to capitulate on my position on a carbon tax misses the point of democracy, which is what we are ostensibly trying to fight for.
In a dire crisis situation such as the one Ukraine finds itself in, fighting against the war of aggression being waged by Putin, it is the Liberal government that should have been working collaboratively to find a unified path forward. If its members are unwilling to budge on the inclusion of a carbon tax in this agreement, then the onus was on them to build consensus with the Canadian public and acknowledge we can have internal differences on a carbon tax while supporting Ukraine.
It is a dangerous, deadly game for the Prime Minister of Canada and anyone in this place to repeatedly suggest that, if a Canadian opposes a carbon tax, they must support Putin. This is a disgusting, morally bankrupt and fundamentally anti-democratic politically motivated aspersion that serves only to divide our country at a time when it desperately needs leadership that unifies it. It does not help Ukraine. It does not help Ukrainian diaspora in Canada.
The Prime Minister eschewed this approach when he failed to table this agreement in Parliament 90 calendar days prior to the commencement of negotiations. In February of 2020, ahead of the renegotiation of the CUSMA agreement, the minister at the time made the following commitment “to require that a notice of intent to enter into negotiations towards a new free trade agreement be tabled in the House of Commons at least 90 calendar days prior to the commencement of negotiations.” That did not happen in this case. There was no collaborative effort.
Again, I want to re-emphasize that I will oppose the Liberal carbon tax. It does not help my constituents. It is not reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is not meeting emissions targets. It is a flawed and failed policy. I will stand here and support Ukraine while saying that anybody who is suggesting we should be making politics over this is actually helping Putin. This line of attack disgusts me because I know the people who are saying these things know better. If they want to earn the votes of Canadians, they should be looking at the issues that are pushing their polls so far south, as opposed to desperately trying to cling to some sort of false narrative that only divides our country. It only helps our country's enemies. It is disgusting, and it seriously needs to stop.
Earlier today the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell would not commit to asking his government to repurpose seized Russian assets. I am not going to stand here and call him a Putin supporter, so no one on the other bench should suggest that, because I firmly, strongly and backed by evidence reject a carbon tax, I somehow support that. This is exactly what the Russian war machine wants. That is the exact narrative it wants, and it needs to stop.
At the same time, what this agreement should be doing is looking at ways to materially help our allies. Just moments ago, the leader of the Conservative Party issued a press release saying that the Prime Minister must send CRV rockets to Ukraine. He is talking about ways that Canada should be sending surplus weapons to help our allies in their fight against Putin. That is a material way we should be helping, not by casting aspersions or trying to divide our country over this issue.
There is another thing that I want to implore every member of the House, as strongly as I can. I am going to read a small paragraph from a colleague in Ukraine, from a note she sent to me. She writes, “The value of frozen Russian assets is estimated to be at least $320 billion. With no reasonable prospect for Russia paying compensation to Ukraine anytime soon and Ukraine's need for both short- and long-term financial assistance, confiscations of Russian assets become the only just and viable option, especially in view of the fact that up to $1 trillion will be needed for Ukraine to fully recover. Our partners' tax-payers”, and this is from a Ukrainian MP, should not shoulder the burden of Ukraine's recovery alone, especially as they froze and can use assets of aggressors responsible for the devastation.”
These are senior government officials in Ukraine today. In the past, some of those senior government officials have suggested that Canada's military is impotent. If they are going to take that posture, then, at the very least, Canada should be using the laws that are already in place, which have already been supported by all members in the House, to repurpose seized Russian assets and lead a G7 charge to force western allies to do exactly what Ukraine is crying out for in this case.
Putin's is a war of aggression, and there needs to be compensation for Ukraine. They are the aggressor. At the very least, if Canada is true, and if Canada is going to try to make any sort of case that we are some sort of broker in the world, that we have any sort of relevancy, this is low-hanging fruit. We should be the first country to do this. We have the legal mechanisms. There is nothing in this agreement about that, absolutely nothing.
The government has had this tool at its disposal for two years now, and it has not moved on this. Am I going to accuse the government of not supporting Ukraine because of that? I could. Instead, I would rather it would move on it.
This is an issue that transcends petty partisan politics and the desperate attempt of a Prime Minister, who is 16 points behind in the polls, trying to cling on to a disgusting life raft for his political gain. We have to work together.
Our global democracy is at stake, folks. Right now, our allies are fighting a war. We have lost the plot here. Honestly, if somebody stands up and dares to question the fact that I will stand up for my constituents against a policy that does nothing to help them, that does nothing to help climate change.
I have watched this debate. I have watched pundits and former colleagues say, “Maybe the Conservatives should just capitulate on this.” Absolutely not. It is the role of the government to build consensus during a time of crisis, and it has failed to do that.
I beg the government to do something that resembles work, and to work with our partners to stop the funding of the Russian war machine by transporting more of Canada's natural gas overseas.
That should have been in this agreement, but it is not. At the very least, today, there is $300 billion. That is more than the entire sum total of all of the aid that has been sent to Ukraine. Canada could be leading the charge on this. Instead, we have Liberal members of Parliament standing here and saying these things. They have lost the plot. Canadians know this. Canadians are not buying this. Let us do better.
I implore and I beg the government to rethink its posture, both on the carbon tax and its political position on the issue, and on dragging its feet on common-sense measures that Conservatives have been calling for for some time, measures for which there is already consensus in the House of Commons and across the country.
1567 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/24 10:40:13 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, standing up and using a loud, shouty voice does not negate from the fact that the Liberals did not engage in a collaborative approach on this agreement. They did not table it in advance for the House of Commons. They did not try to seek consensus, and I oppose a carbon tax.
The Liberal carbon tax has brought Canada nowhere close to meeting its emissions targets. It is increasing the price of everything for everybody in our country at a time when most Canadians cannot afford it. They are choosing between food and rent.
Yes, I oppose a carbon tax. Yes, I disagree with people, even those formerly of my own political stripe, who suggest that we should not. That is why I am here. That is why I am representing my constituents. I can do that and support strong action by Canada against Russian aggression against Ukraine.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, from the very beginning, we have been listening to the Conservatives explain their position on Bill C-57. I am quite surprised. I am actually having a hard time following them, because it was the Conservatives who introduced the first version of the former free trade agreement with Ukraine.
The new version essentially updates the old one, so there is nothing revolutionary about it. Russia and Ukraine are currently at war. One might therefore expect some degree of solidarity amongst all parliamentarians in saying that it is time to support Ukraine, which is fighting the Russian invasion. Given the current reality, Ukraine needs trade with foreign countries more than ever.
I am trying to understand. The Conservatives keep using the notorious carbon tax as an excuse to oppose this. Is this not a bit deceitful and could it not be seen as bad faith? If they were in government, they certainly would not be making the kind of irresponsible comments they are making right now.
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/24 10:42:12 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I oppose the Liberal carbon tax. It does not solve climate change, and it increases the cost of everything. If the government wanted to have a consensus-based approach on this agreement, it would have removed it. It is unnecessary and does not need to be in there. It is in there to be a political wedge, and I will stand up for my constituents.
To my colleague opposite, he needs to go talk to his constituents. They do not support a carbon tax either. They do not want to see an increased cost of living because of it. A carbon tax is not worth the cost. We should be supporting Ukraine with measures such as the one the Conservative leader announced today by sending surplus weapons.
129 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/24 12:01:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this is just another example of the Conservatives being willing to say anything to oppose us in fighting climate change. They want to slash the funding to this organization that Parliament and the House voted for over 20 years ago. We are sticking to the facts and to the due process. We will continue fighting to get to the bottom of this.
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
