SoVote

Apr/9/24 1:00:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would say that the member opposite has clearly misread the memo where the Parliamentary Budget Officer for the House said that Canadians are paying more than $700 per household after getting the rebate, and each province has a different number. Some are at thresholds well over $1,000 and some are a little below. Everybody is losing money; that has been proven in the House. The parliamentary secretary opposite mentioned Germany and a few countries in Europe, and he talked about a cost on pollution. He should have mentioned where Germany, England and France get their energy supply. They get it from Russia. That is where they get it because of what the Prime Minister of this country said. We have one of the largest deposits of natural gas in Canada, in my province, and we have a really short boat ride over to England. If we were to develop our natural gas, which the Prime Minister historically said is uneconomical, they would not have to buy their energy from Putin so that the Liberals could continue to fuel the war machine over there.

190 words

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

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Apr/9/24 1:46:36 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, I would like to invite the hon. member to take out a pen. I have two quick questions. I know he can handle them, and I will let him take some notes. First, he talked about the Atlantic provinces' being part of the clean energy solution to reduce emissions, yet he stands in the way of Bill C-49, a bill that is supported by his home government in Newfoundland and Labrador, without reason. It is a bill that would actually drive really important results for energy jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador. He talked about technology, not taxes, but then voted against the bill. Can he explain his position there? Second, can he give an indication to his constituents and the House as to whether or not he believes climate change is real and that we ought to do something to reduce emissions? How would he incentivize the technology he is talking about? Would he spend taxpayer dollars in an inefficient way to do it? How would he go about that?

173 words

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

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Apr/9/24 1:48:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member spoke about natural gas going to Germany. I was actually in Germany last year. I met with the chancellor at that time and spoke to him. He made it very clear that in the short term, Germany is interested in natural gas, but in the long term, it is not. It is actually interested in renewable energies. I know it is on the other side of the country from the member, but in my province of Alberta, Premier Danielle Smith has shut down 66 billion dollars' worth of investment in renewable energy. I wonder whether the member agrees with Danielle Smith's Conservative stance on renewable energy, knowing that countries around the world want to see Canada move towards a greener energy grid.

127 words

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

Mr. Taylor Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP)

Apr/9/24 3:14:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, many Canadians were let down when the Liberals suddenly ended the greener homes program. Yesterday, we learned that over a billion dollars promised for the program went unspent. Meanwhile, across Canada, hundreds of people built their careers and businesses on providing service as a part of the greener homes program. They were urged to do that by the government. Now they feel like the rug has been pulled out from under them. Some of them are selling their equipment. Why has the minister left these important clean energy workers in limbo?

93 words

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

Mr. Dan Mazier

Apr/9/24 3:25:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that this government is planning to quadruple the carbon tax. That is four times, quadruple. Right now, I have lots of homeowners forwarding their natural gas bills, $100 gas bills that have 100 dollars' worth of carbon tax on them right now. The Liberals want to quadruple that. His natural gas bill, his energy bill, is going to go up to $500 when it is all said and done, thanks to this government.

78 words

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

Ms. Elizabeth May

Apr/9/24 4:53:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the actions of the premier of Alberta are quite baffling, because her decision to put a pause on renewables when there are billions of dollars of investment trying to get into Alberta makes no sense. Alberta has the best potential for solar, and that is where Alberta is a real energy powerhouse. The facility that was recently put in place near Okotoks is delivering solar power at under three cents a kilowatt hour, and it rolled out fast. There is nothing that can compete with that. If we look at solar and wind as sources of electricity, the price to consumers plummets. However, when the marginal cost of a kilowatt hour is zero, the utilities are resistant. Their profit model, their business model, is that they make energy in big megaprojects and sell it along long, stringy lines, where it loses efficiency, to consumers who have no choice but to buy it. We can bring down the price of electricity. Let little communities, indigenous nations and people produce their own electricity with renewables. If we bring down that price, it will help everyone except, for some reason, the Premier of Alberta.

193 words