SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 280 - Feb/12/24

Feb/12/24 3:19:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House call on the government to axe the quadruple carbon tax— Some hon. members: No.

22 words

Context: House Hansard - 280 - Feb/12/24

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

Feb/12/24 7:02:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thought maybe what I would do is reflect on the word “real” that my friend amplified during her four minutes. I give her credit, she knows the four priorities of the Conservative Party. She probably even has the bumper stickers already produced, ready for circulation. In fairness to the member, I suspect that if she does not have them, she will likely be the first Conservative to have the actual bumper stickers. She sticks to the points. I know she puts a great deal of effort into her every word. Sometimes we hear that we should not let the facts deny a potentially good speech. I suspect that my friend across the way adhered to that. She made reference to the 80%, so let us take a look at the 80%. It is the independent Parliamentary Budget Officer, not the Liberals or the NDP or anyone else, who has said that 80% of people will receive more back through the carbon rebate than they will pay in the carbon tax. She would say that if we do this or that, then maybe people might pay more. All of “this or that” does not take into consideration things such as weather patterns or the impact that climate change is having on farms, and that also needs to be taken into consideration. For now, what we should do is acknowledge that the independent Parliamentary Budget Officer is correct when he says that 80% of Canadians will actually receive more money back than they are paying in through the carbon tax. The rebate is bigger than the tax for 80%-plus. In Winnipeg North, I suspect the percentage is even higher. I do not know that for a fact, so I cannot say that as fact. What I can say is that the Conservatives do not talk about cancelling or getting rid of the rebate portion. All they talk about is getting rid of the tax. In reality, it would do two things. One, it would reinforce that the Conservative Party is loaded with climate deniers. Two, it would take net disposable money out of 80%-plus of the residents I represent. However, we would not know that if we listened to the Conservatives. If we listen to the Conservatives, we would think that it is for everyone in Canada, yet provinces like British Columbia and Quebec do not have the carbon tax. However, that does not stop the Conservative leader from going around saying, what I would suggest is misleading information, through social media and other forms, to Canadians that they are going to be better off because if they axe the carbon tax, they would have more money. However, that is factually incorrect on a number of fronts. The bottom line is that I think it is good to have a sound, solid environmental policy. It would be nice to see the Conservative Party share what their new environment policy is. We know that back in 2021, their environmental policy also had a price on pollution or, dare I say, a carbon tax. In fact, the first administration, virtually in North America, to have a carbon tax was the Conservatives in the province of Alberta.

541 words

Context: House Hansard - 280 - Feb/12/24

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

Feb/12/24 7:06:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing to see the parliamentary secretary continue to deny Canadians the truth. The carbon tax is not a price on carbon. It is a tax on individuals. It is a tax on energy. It is a tax on everything that uses energy. It is no more a price on carbon than income taxes are a price on earnings. The truth is the government does not know what the price on carbon is. They even admit it on their website. They are trying to get farmers to make costly investments to reduce methane emissions by promising to give out carbon credits. Yet, the one question every farmer asked was, “How much is the credit worth?” The government cannot say. It cannot say because it does not know. When it comes to a price on a carbon offset, the government admits that the price of something is determined by the supply and demand for that thing. Only a proud socialist could believe that government could set a price by decree. It did not work for Pierre Trudeau and it will not work for the Prime Minister either. That fact is just undeniable.

196 words

Context: House Hansard - 280 - Feb/12/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/12/24 7:07:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is amazing in terms of the places around the world where we see a price on pollution actually being implemented, or a carbon tax. We could talk about Ukraine, which has a price on pollution, a carbon tax, as do countries like Poland, many European countries and, in fact, Mexico. People often say the United States does not have it. It does not have a national carbon tax, but many states have a carbon tax. The reason I say that is, at the end of the day, having a price on pollution, making the polluters pay, is sound public policy. Unfortunately, it is being distorted to the nth degree by the Conservative Party, all in an attempt to have a shiny bumper sticker of deceit for Canadians. I think that is sad. We are supposed to be here to develop and to encourage sound public policy.

149 words

Context: House Hansard - 280 - Feb/12/24

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Feb/12/24 7:23:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, on this side of the House we want to axe the tax. It seems across the way their priorities are to distract and to axe the facts, so let us insert some facts back into this discussion. As we seek to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime, let us be clear that the NDP-Liberal carbon tax is a failed experiment. The government has spent eight years talking about it and about how raising taxes is going to save the planet. It has not worked. The government has not met any of its environmental targets. The environment minister might be planning on climbing on a roof somewhere again because the government has not achieved the results it promised. It was an experiment, one of trying to force people to pay more to see whether that would fix the environmental problems we have. Clearly, it has failed. Let us axe the tax instead of taking the government's approach of axing the facts.

174 words

Context: House Hansard - 280 - Feb/12/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/12/24 7:24:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member across the way gets the gold star for the day for the number of times he said “axe the tax”. He does deserve a pat on the back for that. However, let us take a look at the reality of the situation. The Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc all support a price on pollution. Countries around the world support it; they actually have a price on pollution, or a carbon tax. The Conservatives are the only group that does not, even though in 2021 each member, including the member who just spoke, actually campaigned on a carbon tax. However, they flip-flopped on that; they made a change just because they got a leader with a nice idea for a bumper sticker. That does not make good public policy. I look to the Conservatives to ask them to tell us what their plan is for the environment. What would they do—

159 words