SoVote

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

Apr/9/24 10:46:16 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am curious to know how I am going to vote on today's opposition day motion that we are talking about, at least peripherally. The discussion around carbon taxes always brings to mind, because it is a complex problem, the H.L. Mencken comment, “For every complex problem there is a solution which is clear, simple and wrong.” I could add, as an update, that it very rarely rhymes. I would love to see a discussion that is fact-based, listening to the experts, such as the 200 economists who say carbon pricing works, or to sit down with the premiers and listen to the science. I recently, in this place, spoke of the record of the late Right Hon. Brian Mulroney, who definitely worked with provinces, imposed additional costs to stop pollution and made actions count. We do not have a carbon tax crisis; we have a climate crisis. I would welcome an opportunity to listen to the scientific and economic experts and bring everyone together. Could members of the official opposition confirm that, should this meeting with premiers take place, they would listen to the top experts on climate science at the meeting about the threat to our economy posed by wildfires, heat domes, floods and storms of all kinds that are driven by the climate crisis?

224 words

Context: House Hansard - 296 - Apr/9/24

Mr. Mario Simard

Apr/9/24 11:53:00 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, economists tell us these indirect costs are minimal. Nevertheless, on the subject of indirect costs, we could talk about Alberta's oil royalties. These costs far outstrip those associated with the carbon tax. Why do I never hear my colleagues talk to us about that? We could also talk about the indecent amount of public money funnelled to oil companies, money that could help us provide support for our cities and programming that would be far more beneficial for the population than having us simply give money to an economic sector that is making record profits. We could talk about the major oil companies' refining margins going up—these gluttonous companies that are making record profits. We could talk about all that, but unfortunately the Conservatives' all-consuming passion for the oil industry prevents them from thinking in these terms.

143 words

Context: House Hansard - 296 - Apr/9/24

Mr. Kody Blois

Apr/9/24 1:32:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member mentioned and rightfully recognized that he was part of the first introduction of a carbon price in North America, in British Columbia. It has worked in British Columbia. It has helped reduce emissions and has not impacted the economy. B.C. is doing well within the federation. Perhaps what the hon. member missed during my remarks is that the federal backstop is a tool if provinces choose to not come forward with any type of credible pricing plan. I would ask him to engage with corporate leaders across the country, who will tell him that a carbon price, particularly at the industrial level, matters for economic investment in the country around decarbonization. The member wants to go about it, I guess, in a big-government way, which is not the most cost-effective. It is actually quite anti-Conservative. He wants to use a more expensive way to reduce emissions. Economists are clear that carbon pricing is the most effective way to do so. I guess he also wants government to decide as opposed to letting the private sector decide. Where have the Conservatives gone? Where are the folks on that side who believe in the private market? They are not really stepping forward at this point.

212 words

Context: House Hansard - 296 - Apr/9/24

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

Apr/9/24 2:33:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is important for folks and for Canadians who are watching this debate to be careful about the misinformation being spewed by the Leader of the Opposition. It is important for a responsible government in this country to have a plan to address climate change and to do so in a manner that enhances and addresses affordability concerns. That is exactly what the price on pollution does. Eight out of 10 Canadian families get more money back. Two hundred economists across the country agree with us. It is such a shame that we have a bunch of climate deniers over there who have no plan for the environment and no plan for the economy.

116 words

Context: House Hansard - 296 - Apr/9/24

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Apr/9/24 4:10:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his new grandson. Now that is an achievement. I would like to point out to my colleague that there are people who have estimated the direct impact of the carbon tax per $1,000. It is about $1.50 for every $1,000. This $1.50 does not apply to Quebec. Why do we not have the figures for what would apply in Quebec? Because economists say the figure is too insignificant. One professor did give it a shot. When we look at the indirect impact of the carbon tax per $1,000, we can say that it amounts to barely 25¢. Does my colleague not think it is a bit excessive to have devoted so much time to the carbon tax for barely 25¢ per $1,000?

140 words