SoVote

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

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

Apr/9/24 10:19:30 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.

15 words

Stand
Ask

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/9/24 10:19:35 a.m.
Watch

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC)

Apr/9/24 10:20:41 a.m.
Watch

moved: That the House declare that the Prime Minister convene a carbon tax emergency meeting with all of Canada’s 14 first ministers; that this meeting address: (a) the ongoing carbon tax crisis and the financial burden it places on Canadians, (b) the Prime Minister's recent 23% carbon tax increase, (c) plans for provinces to opt-out of the federal carbon tax to pursue other responsible ideas to lower emissions, given that under the government's current environmental plan, Canada now ranks 62 out of 67 countries on the Climate Change Performance index; and that this meeting be publicly televised and held within five weeks of this motion being adopted. He said: Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock. Imagine for a moment a person who fell into a coma in 2015 and who wakes up today. Imagine the last impression that they would have had at the time, in 2015, when inflation and interest rates were almost as low as they have ever been in the history of Canada. At that time, taxes were falling faster than at any time in Canadian history. The budget was balanced. Crime had just fallen 25%, and small-town folks could even leave their doors unlocked. Our borders were secure and our immigration system was working. It was not perfect, but overall, established Canadians and newcomers were satisfied with the situation, which was orderly and compassionate. Housing cost half of what it does today, the average rent was $950, an almost laughably low number by today's standards, and take-home pay had risen by 10% after tax and after inflation. This represented one of the largest pay and income increases for Canadians in a half century. In fact, this was even making news internationally. The New York Times said that Canada's middle class was richer than America's for the first time. At the same time, trouble was brewing in the world, with wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Ukraine, none of which caused inflation here at home. However, now the person has awoken, eight years later, to find a completely different country. Inflation, after hitting a 40-year high, is still higher than its Bank of Canada target. Per capita income is declining. In fact, Canada has the worst per capita income growth rate of all the G7 countries, and it is expected to have the worst OECD growth out of 40 developed countries for the next five and a half years and the next 35 years. Some families have had their existing mortgages extended to 90 years or even 120 years because their mortgage loan is higher now than when they took it out, due to interest rate hikes that the Prime Minister had promised would never occur. Houses in Canada now cost 50% more than in the United States. People can buy a castle in Sweden for a lower cost than they could buy a two-bedroom apartment in Kitchener. Toronto has the worst housing bubble in the world according to UBS Bank. Vancouver is the third-most expensive city when comparing median income to median housing prices. Vancouver is more expensive than New York, London, Singapore and other places that have more people, more money and less land. Fewer houses were built last year than in 1972. That person waking up today would learn something else: Our national debt has doubled. When they fell into a coma, the national debt was about $600 billion. Now it is up to $1.2 trillion. The debt has doubled. This Prime Minister has added more to our national debt than all other prime ministers combined. The streets have become unsafe. There has been a 100% increase in the number of criminal shootings. People are afraid to walk down the street. Crime is everywhere. Cars are disappearing. When the person wakes up, they will hear Toronto's chief of police telling people to keep their keys near the door so that car thieves can peacefully steal their vehicles. That is the Canada they will wake up to. The Prime Minister's solution to all this is to increase taxes and deficits and to let more criminals loose. Another thing the person will see is that the Bloc Québécois supported all of the policies that led to this nightmare. There is still hope, however, because there is something else the person will see when they wake up: a common-sense party that will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. The first step will be for the Prime Minister to meet with the provincial premiers to reverse the policies that caused the hell we are experiencing across the country and to discuss axing the carbon tax and other taxes in order to allow Quebeckers and all Canadians to succeed through hard work and pay an affordable price for food, housing and gas in a free country. That is good old common sense, and that is what we are offering. Imagine that, in fact, someone had been in a coma for the last eight years. They would have gone to sleep in 2015 in a country where inflation and interest rates were rock-bottom, taxes were falling faster than at any time in Canadian history, the budget was balanced, crime had just fallen 25% so small-town folks could leave their doors unlocked, our borders were secure and our immigration system was uncontroversial, with everyone agreeing it worked and was the best in the world. Housing cost half of what it does today; the average rent was $950, an almost laughably low number by today's standards. Take-home pay had risen by 10% after tax, and after inflation in the preceding years. The New York Times had just called Canada “the richest middle class”; in fact, it said that Canada's middle class was richer than America's for the first time. This was with lots of trouble in the world, with wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and, yes, Ukraine, none of which caused inflation here at home. At the time, of course, we had former prime minister Harper, who was able to keep inflation and unemployment low even while the world suffered turmoil. However, now the person has awoken, eight years later, to find a completely different place. Inflation, after hitting a 40-year high, is still 50% higher than its 2% target. The economy is shrinking in per capita terms; it is smaller than it was six years ago, perhaps the first time that has ever happened in Canadian history. Canada is expected to have the worst OECD growth out of 40 countries for the next five and a half years and the next 35 years. It now takes 25 years to save up for a down payment for a mortgage in Toronto, and many people have had their existing mortgage extended to 90 years and 120 years, meaning their great-grandchildren will still be paying it off. Houses in Canada now cost 50% more than in the United States. People can buy a castle in Sweden for a lower cost than for a two-bedroom home in Kitchener. Toronto has the worst housing bubble in the world. Vancouver is the third-most expensive when comparing median income to median housing prices. This is the nightmare that would have been unimaginable to someone had they fallen into a coma and just awoken now. However, there is good news. They do not want to fall back into a coma, because the best is yet to come. We now have a common-sense Conservative alternative that will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. We call on the Prime Minister to meet the premiers and talk to them about their desire to see the tax cut or eliminated altogether. Let us grant relief to our people now until there can be a carbon tax election, where the people of this country will restore the common-sense consensus that will allow anyone from anywhere to do anything their birthright is, so that with hard work they can afford a good home and good food in a safe neighbourhood in the country we love, which is all of our homes. It is their home, my home and our home. Let us bring it home.

1413 words

Harper

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

Apr/9/24 10:31:03 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, one of the problems with the leader of the official opposition's speech is that it is often, whether it is inside the House or outside the House, factually incorrect. If they are axing anything, it is the facts, and the reality they portray is exceptionally misleading. For example, he talks about there being no immigration problems. He can tell that to the thousands of people who could not sponsor parents or he can tell that to the thousands of people who could not sponsor a spouse when he was actually in government, when immigration was a so-called no problem. Those are the actual facts. He talked about the economy. It took Stephen Harper 10 years to create a million jobs. In less than eight years, we have doubled that. We have created over two million jobs. I am wondering if the member could be a bit more honest with the facts, whether it is here or outside of Ottawa.

163 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Apr/9/24 10:32:00 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I do not need to criticize the government's immigration policy because the Prime Minister has done it for me. He has said that the immigration system is out of control. Those are his words, reiterated by his immigration minister, both of them apparently blaming the preceding immigration minister for screwing the entire system up so badly that they allowed hundreds of thousands of students to come in to study at fake institutions that do not even exist. They are diploma mills, by the government's own description. Now those kids are abused, taken advantage of and forced to work 20 hours a week. They are going home in body bags and forced to rent out half a bed for four hours a day, paying $700 a month. It is absolute chaos in our immigration system after eight years of the cocktail of total incompetence and radicalism that has defined the Prime Minister and his appallingly incompetent immigration and now housing minister, the member from Nova Scotia, who has given us 35 homeless encampments in the biggest city in his home province. That is the deplorable record that someone, having fallen into a coma eight years ago, would be shocked to wake up to.

206 words

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

Apr/9/24 10:33:36 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have a simple policy question. It should have a simple yes or no answer. The industrial carbon tax on big polluters has been doing the lion's share of emissions reduction. It is one of the most important climate policies. We all know where the Conservative leader stands on the consumer carbon tax, but he has avoided answering questions on the industrial carbon tax on big oil and gas. Could he please answer a simple yes or no question? Would he scrap the industrial carbon tax?

89 words

Emissions

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Apr/9/24 10:34:11 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there is no industrial carbon tax on the oil and gas sector, so the member should do her research before she asks questions like that. In Alberta the province has something called the TIER system, which is a provincially administered system. It stands for technology innovation and emissions reduction. It allows the large industrial players to invest in green initiatives to reduce their emissions at no cost to consumers. It is one of the reasons our oil and gas sector is the most advanced in the world. What I propose is that we produce more of our clean Canadian oil and gas to displace the dirty dictators of the world. The real question is why the NDP wants to put good union workers in western Canada on the unemployment line, steal their jobs and send those jobs to foreign dictators around the world. We common-sense Conservatives would bring home those powerful paycheques for our people in this country.

161 words

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

Apr/9/24 10:35:27 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we will be spending another day in the Conservative Party's mythical carbon tax bubble. What a shame. However, I do agree with the Leader of the Opposition about the Liberal Party's abysmal record when it comes to housing. Its record is absolutely atrocious. I toured Quebec this past year. No one I talked to ever mentioned eliminating the carbon tax as a potential solution to the housing crisis. What people did tell us is that the cities are not the problem. The cities are not the ones causing delays. The federal government is the one holding up the work by launching program after program. One possible solution that the Bloc Québécois will shortly be proposing is to have the federal government pay a single transfer for housing like it does for health care. That would reduce both delays and costs. Is the leader of the Conservative Party in favour of such a measure?

161 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Apr/9/24 10:36:23 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois has supported every program that the Liberals have brought to the table. The Bloc Québécois voted in favour of this government's $500‑billion discretionary spending in the estimates. That money will be used to centralize and expand the government's powers. I want to clarify that I am not talking about spending on health care or seniors, which is already legislated and does not need to be voted on in the House. I am talking about spending on bureaucracy, consultants and large centralizing programs here in Ottawa. Ottawa needs to stop building a bigger bureaucracy. Ottawa needs to shrink the bureaucracy and ensure there is more construction, less red tape and more houses. That is the Conservatives' common-sense policy.

135 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay (South Surrey—White Rock, CPC)

Apr/9/24 10:37:24 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I offer my thanks to the Leader of the Opposition for this motion, which calls on the Prime Minister to listen to the calls of the premiers to talk about the carbon tax. After eight years of the NDP-Liberal government, food bank usage is at record highs. Young people cannot afford to buy homes. Canadians cannot afford to put food on the table. Gas is over two dollars a litre in British Columbia. Despite the Liberal media misinformation, this is a direct result of the failed carbon tax and a $1.2-trillion national debt. In fact, that is the policy intention of this tax. Canadians are hurting because of it, but the Prime Minister is not listening and does not care. Instead, he chose to hike the carbon tax by 23% on April 1. Worse, he plans to quadruple it by 2030, which is not sustainable. The premiers of Saskatchewan, Alberta and New Brunswick recently wrote to the Liberal chair of the finance committee asking for an opportunity to express their frustrations with the carbon tax and relay the concerns of their citizens who are struggling with rising costs. The Liberal chair, the member for Mississauga East—Cooksville, ignored the premiers and refused to call a meeting. I will take this opportunity to recognize and thank the brave chair of the government operations committee, my colleague, the member for Edmonton—West, who demonstrated principled leadership. He convened meetings at government operations so that the committee, and by extension Canadians, could hear from the premiers directly. Sadly, their concerns fell on deaf Liberal ears. The premiers of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Ontario and even the Liberal Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador have written to the Prime Minister, demanding a meeting to address carbon tax issues. They understand an urgency that the Prime Minister ignores. Last week, the Leader of the Opposition also wrote to the Prime Minister, echoing the demands of the premiers and asking for an emergency meeting to hear from them directly. The Prime Minister's response was that he had a meeting with them in 2016. That is an absolutely pathetic response. None of the premiers he met with in 2016 is still in office today. Here is the reality. The NDP-Liberal carbon tax is a scam. It is nothing more than a tax plan disingenuously disguised as an environmental plan. It is a behavioural science tool designed to control people’s behaviour, not to reduce emissions. In fact, it has not reduced emissions but continues to punish Canadian families for the crimes of buying groceries and filling up at the pumps. The Parliamentary Budget Officer confirmed as much, saying that “most households will see a net loss”. To put it simply, the carbon tax is just like the Prime Minister: a failure and not worth the cost. Skyrocketing food prices have resulted in record food bank usage, including in my community of South Surrey—White Rock. It was recently reported that more than 1,000 residents are now using the South Surrey food bank every week. That is a 35% increase. The Guru Nanak Food Bank, which operates in both Surrey and Delta, is not even included in the B.C. food bank statistics. It is now helping support three times more families than in 2020, when it opened. It even has a special section for international students. Food banks in my community are also dealing with a significant shortage in donations, raising concerns that they may not be able to accommodate the increase in demand. This is heartbreaking, but it is the reality after eight years, despite what the government would have us believe. The carbon tax is not popular. In fact, there is only one provincial party that is enthusiastically embracing the carbon tax, and that’s the B.C. NDP. Mainstreet Research recently asked British Columbians who they agreed with when it came to the carbon tax dispute between the federal Conservative leader and David Eby. Fifty-four per cent of respondents agreed with our leader and our position that the carbon tax hike should not have been spiked on April 1. Only 34% of respondents agreed with Premier David Eby. British Columbians are being forced to choose among filling up their cars, heating their homes and feeding their families. Over 200,000 British Columbians are using the food bank every month, yet Premier Eby is happily implementing this federally mandated tax grab. On page 75 of the 2024 B.C. budget, it states, “Budget 2023 implemented annual increases to the tax to align with federal requirements. B.C.’s carbon tax is currently at $65 per tonne, and will increase every April 1 by $15 per tonne until rates are equal to $170 per tonne in 2030.” He is telling us now that B.C.'s carbon tax will increase to comply with the Prime Minister's mandate. According to the Vancouver Sun, B.C.'s carbon tax will rise by $9 billion over the next three years and only credit back $3.5 billion. Liberal math defies understanding. That is a net cost to British Columbians of five and a half billion dollars. This brings me back to the motion we are debating today. Whether or not the NDP-Liberal government can admit it, we are in a carbon tax crisis. Despite the opposition of 70% of Canadians and seven out of 10 premiers, the Prime Minister refused to spike the hike April 1 and, instead, chose to inflict more pain on Canadians when they can least afford it. When it comes to emissions reductions, the carbon tax has been a demonstrable failure. COP ranks Canada 62nd out of 67 countries on climate performance. Once again, the NDP-Liberal government does not have an environmental plan; it has a tax plan. Provinces need the flexibility to determine what is best in their jurisdictions. Conservatives believe in using technology that actually delivers results, such as by green-lighting green projects, exporting LNG to end Europe’s dependence on Russian oil, and capturing and storing carbon. We do not believe in virtue signalling and taxes that only inflict pain on struggling Canadian families. The reality is that the carbon tax crisis is the Prime Minister's own making, and his response to the premiers is unacceptable. What is he afraid of? Although we are separated by thousands of kilometres, our citizens are all facing the same grinding issues. For a Confederation such as ours to work, we need to bring people together; if there was ever a time to do so, it is now. The Prime Minister must call a meeting, sit down with the premiers and let Canadians into the conversation. After all, the Prime Minister said, “Government and its information must be open by default.” Now is his chance, his big moment. The Prime Minister needs to do the right thing. He needs to show some courage, sit down with the premiers, whom he has never met with before, and end the carbon tax crisis that he created. He needs to do his job.

1202 words

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

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

Apr/9/24 10:47:45 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I always welcome questions from a fellow British Columbian member of Parliament. It is hard to speculate on what a dialogue would look like if we have a Prime Minister who effectively says, “Well, I met with him in 2016.” He has not even opened the door yet to such a conference. Certainly, details can be arranged after that, but there has to be a willingness by the government to sit down and show courage where there is a national crisis and actually put bones onto solutions by talking to the first ministers in this country. This is a big country, but this Confederation was built on dialogue. If there is no dialogue, there are no solutions. Talking to each other is always the way forward.

130 words

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

Apr/9/24 10:48:42 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the biggest problem that I anticipate in the debate coming from the Conservatives today is that they will axe the facts throughout. At the end of the day, I think it does a great disservice to Canadians. I put this out to the member across the way. I have had a difficult time trying to get a Conservative member of Parliament to actually debate this issue with me, whether in Ottawa or in Winnipeg at any public school. I would welcome any member of the Conservative caucus to debate me on this issue, on the carbon rebate versus the carbon tax, any day if they had the courage to do so. However, I suspect not one of them will take me up on that. If the Conservative Party is so confident of its policy position, why is it scared to actually have a public debate on the issue?

150 words

Carbon

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

Apr/9/24 10:49:37 a.m.
Watch

Well, Mr. Speaker, that was incredible. The reason it is incredible is that the member is talking about people going to public schools in his riding, which he is probably afraid to lose in the next election, and talking about this issue. We want the first ministers of this country, the people elected by our citizens. There is only one taxpayer after all. We want them to get together and show leadership. Leadership starts with the Prime Minister calling a meeting. We will debate this any time. My goodness, the Leader of the Opposition has been out at rallies, bringing in thousands of people right across the country, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, talking about this issue. Seventy per cent of Canadians and seven out of 10 premiers agree with us on this. Let us get the job done.

142 words

Taxpayer

Mr. Rhéal Éloi Fortin (Rivière-du-Nord, BQ)

Apr/9/24 10:50:47 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we know that greenhouse gas emissions are the cause of considerable climate change and have led to significant increases in the price of vegetables, grains and fruit in recent years. The whole point of the carbon tax is to lower greenhouse gas emissions. That is one thing. For another thing, Quebec decided to join the Western Climate Initiative, which is a kind of carbon exchange. California and British Columbia both participate. As a result, Quebec is unaffected by the carbon tax. Would our Conservative colleagues be willing to join Quebec and British Columbia in the carbon exchange? It would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and keep inflation in check, without monopolizing our time every day simply trying to reduce or eliminate a carbon tax that plays such a useful role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

136 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

Apr/9/24 10:51:59 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would just say that we are aiming for co-operation and dialogue in this motion. We want to include the premiers of all provinces, including Quebec. Therefore, let us just get to the table, have the discussion, show leadership at both the provincial and national levels, and show how this Confederation can actually work at a time of crisis for Canadians right across the country.

68 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)

Apr/9/24 10:52:37 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is great to be back in the House of Commons, although it is sad that we are debating the same tired argument that the Conservatives have been bringing forward for the last two years. It is clear that the Conservative war on facts, evidence and science continues, even since the Harper era. Now it is math they disagree with. The failed former leader of the Conservative Party from Regina—Qu'Appelle and the petro-puppet from Carleton are on this cover-up campaign with the Premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, who raised the price of gas on April 1 by more than the price on pollution. By the way, that price increase did not include any type of rebate, so it is clear why the Conservatives are here and who they are here for. It is not for Canadians or to stand up for affordability; it is to play a role in the cover-up campaign for the Premier of Alberta and to defend the greedy corporate interests of big oil and gas giants, as they always have. Nothing changes with the Conservative Party, but things are changing with our climate. In fact, March 2024 was the hottest March ever on record. Guess what, Mr. Speaker: February had the highest temperature and was the hottest February ever on record. January was the same. Actually, that has been the case for the last 10 consecutive months. Every single month has been a record-breaking month for temperature. The hottest year on record was 2023. Now, in 2024, it is only April and there are already wildfires burning. Last year, 5.7 million acres of Canadian forests burned down because of out-of-control wildfires, and the Conservative leader blamed it on arson, which we know is not the case. Climate change has dried our forests out and increased the severity of wildfires. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Adam van Koeverden: Mr. Speaker, even still, the Conservative caucus of climate change deniers is heckling over there. I know Conservatives do not believe in climate change, but Canadians do; they demand that we stand up, lower our emissions and take a leading role on fighting climate change around the world. If one does not believe in climate change, then one must believe in the amount of money these wildfires are costing Canadians. There was over $1.5 billion in economic losses last year just from wildfires and an incremental $700 million of insured losses. That does not include drought, floods, hurricanes, extreme weather or hyperfocused precipitation, as we have seen across this country. Climate change is an existential threat to our economy, our livelihoods and our very lives, and the Conservatives want to ignore it. Who do they want to rely on for insight, for expertise and research? Our universities provide us with that insight. Last week, when 200 leading economists from across this country wrote an open letter in support of carbon pricing, a spokesperson for the Conservative leader, the petro-puppet from Carleton, called them “so-called ‘experts’”. I am sorry, but these are people who earned their degrees. They went to university, did the research and got a Ph.D. They are experts, not so-called experts. They are leading researchers in the field. This is coming from a guy who has never earned an honest red cent in his life. He has never contributed a dollar to our economy. This is the only job he has ever had, here in the House of Commons. It is pathetic coming from somebody with no expertise. I would like to spend the rest of my time today reading into the record the open letter from the economists on the Canadian carbon pricing. This is not political rhetoric, a bumper sticker or a slogan that looks good on a hoodie. We are getting facts and evidence, irrefutable mathematics, from our experts. Mr. Speaker, I am sharing my time today with the member for Winnipeg North.

671 words

Ms. Elizabeth May

Apr/9/24 10:56:45 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I hope that everyone in this place will forgive me for the interruption, but as a member of Parliament, I believe that my work here does earn an honest red cent. I agree with the parliamentary secretary that it is important for those of us here to have actually had jobs outside of politics, but he might want to rethink that, Mr. Speaker, and it is up to you to recommend on this.

82 words

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/9/24 10:57:06 a.m.
Watch

I appreciate the hon. member's intervention in this. I will remind hon. members to be judicious in the words they choose, especially when speaking on the floor of the House and talking about other members. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

40 words

Secretary

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

Apr/9/24 10:57:23 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will certainly take that under advisement. I will continue now to read the open letter from economists on Canadian carbon pricing. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. Adam van Koeverden: Mr. Speaker, it would be great if I did not have to raise my voice and yell, but the Conservative members want to heckle, so I will continue to speak at a volume that will allow them to hear it. This open letter from economists on Canadian carbon pricing was signed by over 200 leading experts. These are people who are doing research on a regular basis to determine what facts and evidence should be included in the political discourse. The letter starts: As economists from across Canada, we are concerned about the significant threats from climate change. We encourage governments to use economically sensible policies to reduce emissions at a low cost, address Canadians’ affordability concerns, maintain business competitiveness, and support Canada’s transition to a low-carbon economy. Canada’s carbon-pricing policies do all those things. The member for Carleton, the Conservative leader, might call them so-called experts, or he might even call them Liberals. That is not true, and that is not a fact. These are people who work in our universities, teach our students and conduct world-class research, and their facts and evidence ought to be read into the record. I am proud to do that today. These economists refute five claims. The first Conservative claim is, “Carbon pricing won't reduce GHG emissions.” The open letter states: “What the evidence shows: Not only does carbon pricing reduce emissions, but it does so at a lower cost than other approaches.” This was reiterated by Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe just the other day, which is that they looked at other things, but they were all more expensive, so they are relying on the federal backstop program. Not only does carbon pricing reduce emissions, but it does so at a lower cost than other approaches. The open letter continues: Since federal carbon pricing took effect in 2019, Canada’s GHG emissions have fallen by almost 8 percent...the Canadian Climate Institute shows that federal and provincial carbon pricing, for industries and consumers, is expected to account for almost half of Canada’s emissions reductions by 2030. That is basic economics and common sense. The letter further states, “Carbon pricing is the lowest cost approach because it gives each person and business [in our communities] the flexibility to choose the best way to reduce their carbon footprint. Other methods, such as direct regulations, tend to be more intrusive and inflexible, and cost more.” One of the reasons that Conservatives around the world in other countries rely on carbon pricing is that it is a market-based instrument considered widely as a Conservative approach to lowering emissions. Conservative claim number two is, “Carbon pricing drives up the cost of living and is a major cause of inflation.” This is totally false. The letter states, “What the evidence shows: Canadian carbon pricing has a negligible impact on overall inflation.” The Conservatives can repeat their claims and their slogans all they want. That is not science. It is not evidence, It is not math. It is false. The letter continues, “The sharp increase in inflation between 2021 and 2023 was caused by several factors, mainly related to the COVID-19 pandemic...and the impact of the Russia-Ukraine war on commodity prices.” Just a few minutes ago, the petro-puppet from Carleton was standing in the House suggesting that the war in Ukraine did not cause any inflation in Canada. This is absolutely false. These forces are global, which is why the most advanced countries, whether they have a carbon price or not, experienced very similar inflation. Carbon pricing has caused less than one-twentieth of Canada's inflation in the past two years. As well, 90% of the revenues generated are rebated back to households, which means that families receive more money in rebates than they pay in carbon pricing, particularly those with low and modest incomes. The letter states, “Climate change, on the other hands, poses a real threat to Canadians' economic well-being...climate change will cost our economy at least $35 billion by 2030, and much more in future decades.” Again, this reiterates that this is an existential threat for Canadians and for our species on planet earth. Conservative claim number three is, “It makes little sense to have both a carbon price and rebates.” The letter states, “The price-and-rebate approach provides an incentive to reduce carbon emissions...while maintaining most households’ overall purchasing power (due to the rebate).” Giving most back to families, through the Canada carbon rebate, carbon pricing revenues and rebates do not undermine the goal of the price. As well, there is still the incentive to reduce emissions. This is another Conservative claim debunked by expert economists. Conservative claim number four is “Carbon pricing harms Canadian business competitiveness.” The letter states: What the evidence shows: Canada’s carbon-pricing scheme is designed to help businesses reduce emissions at low cost, while competing in the emerging low-carbon global economy. For large emitting sectors in most provinces—like oil, steel and cement—there is an “output-based” carbon pricing system. In effect, it means most large industries pay the carbon price only on the last 10-20 percent of their emissions. The lower-emitting firms pay less while higher-emitting firms pay more—creating a strong incentive for all firms to reduce emissions. It is also important to highlight here that the vast majority of the oil and gas used in the agriculture sector, or 97% of it, is exempt from carbon pricing. Conservative claim number five is, “Carbon pricing isn't necessary.” The letter states, “Here the critics are actually right. Canada could abandon carbon pricing and still hit our climate targets by using other types of regulations and subsidies—but it would be much more costly to do so” for businesses, our economy and for consumers. The letter continues, “Unfortunately, the most vocal opponents of carbon pricing are not offering any alternative policies to reduce emissions and meet our climate goals.” There are more than 200 Canadian economists who wrote a letter to the Conservative Party asking it to adjust some of its demands because they are not based on fact or evidence. If there is even one Canadian economist who disagrees with these 200 economists, I would ask Conservative members to bring their facts and evidence to the House and read them into the record because Canadians demand policies that are based on facts, evidence, science and research, not bumper stickers, slogans and overly repeated political rhetoric.

1162 words