44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 9, 2024 10:00AM
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 11:03:48 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member for Milton stated, “building highways doesn't fight climate change.” Does the member still stand by his anti-road building statement?
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 11:04:02 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member just brought up a tweet that I put out a couple of years ago.
An hon member: Yes or no?
Mr. Adam van Koeverden: Mr. Speaker, he is yelling, “Yes or no?” right now at the top of his lungs.
I believe that building highways is not a way to fight climate change. It is true. We should find ways to rely more on active transportation, public transit and trains. In my community, we require both-direction, all-day GO train service, so a lot of people use their cars when they do not have to.
It is true that we need highways. It is true that we need roads, and we need more of them in Canada with our growing population, but that does not mean that highways should be used as a wedge or recommendation to fight climate change. Conservatives want to say when we build more highways, we get less gridlock and less carbon emissions, and that is proven to be false.
Yes, I stand by my statement.
177 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 11:08:03 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that member is one of the most vociferous climate change deniers in the House of Commons. He stands up to deny Canadians', humans', impact on climate change.
I read into the record the recommendations and the policy guidelines of people who do this work for a living. They are not their opinions. These are facts that have been uncovered by research and mathematics.
The amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is approximately 350 parts per million. When it goes a lot higher than that, we have problems. Just like inside a greenhouse, plants consume carbon dioxide. That is something that a lot of Conservatives and climate change deniers will say is plant food. No, carbon dioxide is not plant food. It is part of the photosynthetic process.
The rhetoric that the oceans are responsible for more climate change than humans are is absolutely astonishing. It is that type of climate change denial, that type of fact-free rhetoric, that Canadians do not need in this debate.
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 11:55:10 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the reasons why the Conservatives do not want to take action on climate change are very simple. The only reason is the oil industry.
Unfortunately, what will that accomplish in the long term? Since everyone is putting a price on carbon, Quebec's competitiveness in its trade with Europe and the United States will be affected because the Conservatives and the Liberals have decided that the economic sector they are going to focus on is the Canadian oil and gas industry.
The only solution for us is independence.
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 12:03:03 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Victoria.
It is always an honour to rise in the House to speak, but I am deeply ashamed at the ignorance and failure of the Parliament of Canada and Canada's politicians from the provincial level up to deal with the greatest crisis we, as a civilization and people, have ever faced. I say that because wildfire season is officially under way in British Columbia. It began in Alberta in February, when northern Alberta was bringing back its firefighting crews. In northern Ontario, our firefighting crews are getting ready.
I am 61 years old. Some people might say I never grew up, and that is fair, but one thing in all my 61 years is that I always felt so much excitement every single spring because I thought of summer. This year when I talk with people about summer, they talk about fire season. This is the planet we are giving to our children. As a 61-year-old white guy with grey hair, I expect young people to look at us and ask what we did when the crisis came.
We know that the Conservatives ridiculed, laughed and snorted every time we talked about the climate crisis. However, climate crisis deniers are not just the ones who troll about it and ridicule and try to deny the science. We see other forms of climate denial, such as thinking that if one puts out enough press releases, somehow the planet will get better, or that big oil will continue to be allowed to destroy the planet but that somehow if we just keep giving it money it will somehow find a way to make increasing fossil fuel production net-zero, and we will all be better off.
We note that the Liberal government underspent by $15 billion on climate commitments. In the face of a climate catastrophe, the press releases went out. The money was promised but it was not spent. I mention this because, in order to bring a bit of reality to the conversation today, I want to bring a few facts about what is happening in the outside world.
This past month, Antarctica posted the single-biggest increase that has ever been recorded on the planet, a 38.5°C jump. A glaciologist, Professor Martin Siegert, stated that no one ever thought anything like this could ever happen: “It is extraordinary and a real concern. We are now having to wrestle with something that is completely unprecedented.” Another scientist has called it “simply “mind-boggling”. Furthermore, what we are seeing in the Atlantic over just the last 14 months are the highest temperatures ever recorded.
Of course people in the climate denial world will say that it is going to be life as normal; it will just be a little hotter and it will just be a little different. It is the problem of Lucretius, which is that nobody can anticipate a problem bigger than what they have seen in their lifetime, so we have no capacity to recognize the damage and the ongoing planetary breakdown that is happening. In 2023, there was the loss of global tree cover in the areas outside of the tropics like Brazil, where the trees are being hacked down. The fact is that Canada was responsible for the largest tree cover loss recorded, with a 24% loss in a single year. That is from our burning forests.
I would think that the Conservatives would have thought it would great to bring all our parliamentarians and provincial leaders together to talk about solutions to the crisis, but that is not what they care about. This is about a “gotcha” moment. There are a couple of things in the Conservative motion I am kind of interested in, but some of it I just find ridiculous. If this were going to be about “the ongoing carbon tax crisis and the financial burden it places on Canadians”, that would show leadership. It would show vision. It would show we are being adults and we care about our kids, but no, Conservatives do not want to talk about that. They are going to let our kids burn.
Then it is being said that we are going to bring our premiers in to talk about options of opting out of the carbon tax. Are we going to do that with the Doug Ford grifter government? Ontario was not paying the carbon tax until Doug Ford said, “Hey, you know what? We're going to get rid of cap and trade and then make every ordinary Ontarian pay a carbon tax.” Then he then turned around and asked, “Whoa, how come we have this carbon tax?” He said it was because of the bad Liberal government.
Do we seriously think that we are going to let a grifter such as Doug Ford come in and talk about how to deal with the climate crisis? This is a guy who, as soon as he was elected, went and ripped up all the EV charging stations and then realized, “Oh my God, Ontario wants to be an automotive superpower with EV. Someone is going to have to build those EV charging stations.”
Are we going to invite Danielle Smith, the conspiracy queen-in-chief? Alberta had a carbon tax. It was a made-in-Alberta solution. The NDP Alberta solution made a lot more sense than the Liberal solution ever did, because it was about taking money from pollution and reinvesting in business and in alternatives. The Notley government said that they needed to reduce emissions in Alberta. They wanted to get it down by, I think, 30 million tonnes by 2030, and the money from pollution was going to be reinvested. Even some of those big oil companies got backhanders on that if they were willing to commit to clean energy and alternatives. However, Danielle Smith came and ripped all that up, and then she kicked out $66 billion in clean energy projects strictly for ideology. There is no place on the planet where we can get more clean energy projects off the ground at the drop of a hat than in Alberta, but she did not want any of that. What do we have in Alberta now? Alberta has rolling blackouts in April. This is Canada's energy superpower, and she cannot even keep the power on. This is a failed-state approach.
The other thing is that Alberta is suffering a severe drought from the climate catastrophe, but we have not seen a single Conservative from Saskatchewan or Alberta get up and talk about how they are actually burning the province. Now they are saying that maybe they will get themselves this Athabasca pipeline to take water out of the already suffering, damaged Athabasca water system; however, that is not going to be shipped down to southern Alberta, because it is needed by big oil.
The issue here, and this is my problem with the Liberal carbon levy, is that the carbon tax was always a market solution. Therefore, we did not actually penalize the people who were burning our planet and knew they were doing it. I cannot go back and explain to working-class Joe back home that “Hey, you pay the money, then you get more back.” He will ask, “So, what does it do?” That is a good question. I will agree with the Conservatives on their motion that Canada is now 62nd out of 67 countries on the climate change performance index, but what they do not say is that the reason Canada is at the back of the pack is that we have never targeted those who are causing the emission increases.
The oil and gas sector never had any intention of lowering emissions; it never even tried. The intensity of creating oil in Canada today is higher than it was in 1990. When those in the sector talk about carbon capture and want us to give them billions for that, it is not to take it out of the atmosphere but so they can pump out more oil; it is about more fossil fuels. Alberta is responsible for close to 40% of Canada's emissions. Where does that come from? Is the average Albertan any more wasteful than the average Canadian anywhere else? No, it is coming out of one sector; that sector has not been doing its job, and now our planet is on fire. However, we do not see any willingness from the Liberals to actually take this on, and the Conservatives will take on anything except the fact that our planet is on fire and that we are at peak carbon.
The fact is that the emissions that are now being registered coming out of the oil sands are 6,000 times higher than registered. I come from mining country; if a mine was pumping emissions into the local river that were 6,000 times higher than allowed, there would be charges and arrests. If we were sold a product that had 6,000 times more risk to human health, something would be done. However, in Alberta, they have the Alberta Energy Regulator, which is basically an extension of Richie Rich Kruger and probably has an office down the hall.
Why am I going at them so hard? It is because they knew all along. They knew in the late 1950s of the simple science that increased carbon will create a situation where we will get greenhouse gas emissions.
The American Petroleum Institute did a study in 1982 that plotted out the timelines of what was going to be a slow-moving disaster. The study said that significant temperature changes were certain to occur by the year 2000, and this would lead to the eventual collapse of the Antarctic ice shelf—
1667 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 12:17:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is hard to be brief when the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay is a voice of conscience in this place. He is the only person in days, weeks, maybe months, besides perhaps myself and the hon. member for Victoria, who speaks to the fact that the climate crisis threatens the future of our children, our grandchildren and civilization itself. It is in our hands to make a difference early.
The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay is right. The government underspent by $15 billion on climate action and overspent by an obscene $34 billion to build the Trans Mountain pipeline that we do not want.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 12:29:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Canadians absolutely deserve affordable, low-carbon alternatives. It is unfortunate that the Conservative Party refuses to actually propose credible climate policy that would provide Canadians with those affordable, low-carbon alternatives. It is mind-boggling that the Leader of the Opposition continues to go out campaigning to scrap a policy without presenting how he would fill the emissions reduction gap, make life more affordable for Canadians and make a more climate-safe future for people now and future generations.
81 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:01:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the way the motion reads, it calls it a “carbon tax emergency”. Right now, we are seeing global ocean temperatures higher than ever in history. We had 100 dormant fires in northern Alberta for the first time in our history. On Vancouver Island, where I live, we are 54% below the average snowpack, like most of British Columbia. There are drought-like conditions right across the Prairies. That is an emergency. That is called a climate emergency.
I am going to read a quote from Sandy Garossino. She was at the energy talks in Parksville. She stated on X, “Please stop talking like a teenager trying to get out of family chores.” That comment was directed at Conservatives.
Is my colleague going to offer any solutions today to tackle the climate emergency, or is he going to continue to try to get out of doing his chores, like everybody else?
156 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:05:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, respect and decorum in the House should be the first thing that all members come to an agreement on and behave accordingly.
I will be splitting my time with the hon. member from the beautiful province of Nova Scotia, the hon. member for Kings—Hants, a good friend and a dear colleague.
Before beginning the discussion on the heart of the debate, let us just put a simple fact out there. Today, we found out that the world has experienced its hottest March on record, marking the 10th straight month of breaking global temperatures, according to the EU Copernicus Climate Change Service.
The month of March 2024 is the hottest March on record due to climate change, and we have an opposition party with half or three-quarters of its members do not even realize or believe that climate change is real and that we need to act. They have absolutely no plan.
I understand I have a heckler—
163 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:06:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member has made an accusation that 50% of the Conservatives do not believe in climate change. I think he needs to prove it. Maybe it is 100%.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:16:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let us just put some facts on the record here.
Catherine McKenna, when she was the climate minister, deleted 100 years of climate data in this country. We can leave it up to debate as to why she did that.
Let us go to an organization that has actually been collecting data for a very long period of time. Let us use their data and see what it says. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the United States has some weather data that says that this past March was only the 17th warmest in the last 130 years. In fact, March was 2°F colder than it was in 1905.
There is data out there that tells everybody that what he said was, in fact, a mistruth. I am just wondering what the member would have to say about that and the fact that there is actual real data out there. He did not use any data in his arguments, but there are organizations that actually have it.
172 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:17:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I work with my hon. colleague on the natural resources committee. I have much respect for him. I know he does a great job representing his constituents, much like we all do.
There is obviously a difference of opinion here in terms of looking at the data. As I cited in my speech, the Copernicus Science Centre in Europe just stated that we had the hottest March in recorded temperature history.
Climate change is real. It is serious. It is a risk. We owe it to our kids to leave a healthier and cleaner environment and a strong economy. That is exactly what we are doing.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:20:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for bringing clarity to the House in regard to the various positions of different parties. Not too long ago, the Conservatives actually denied at a convention that climate change was taking place. In the last election, they flip-flopped and had it as part of their pillar within their campaign platform.
Can the member reflect on the Conservatives' various positions and maybe shed some light on where the Conservatives are today when it comes to climate change?
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:34:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member for Miramichi—Grand Lake made the assertion in the House, as I understand it, because I heard the back end of his comments, that fires were not as a result of climate change, that the extreme weather we were seeing was not tied to climate change, that people would go out and set fires themselves. I take notice that some fires are started accidentally, but the idea that all forest fires we are seeing or the extremity of the weather that we are seeing has no connection to climate change is the most tone-deaf thing I think I have heard this entire week in the House and maybe in last couple of months.
To address the other portion of the member's question around having larger corporate entities and businesses contribute toward programs that matter to Canadians and toward the programs that could help reduce emissions, I agree with the concept of how to ensure our larger emitters can be responsible for driving those investments and reducing emissions. I do think we are at a time right now where corporate leadership needs to be cognizant and read the room.
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 1:36:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I mentioned in my remarks, I fought very hard for his constituents and mine and all rural Canadians to get a higher rural top-up of 20%, which his party is standing in the way of right now in relation to rural Canadians. On the definition, the member is absolutely right. There has to be a revisiting of what defines a rural community versus what is not.
I know the hon. member is a good man. I encourage him to push the Conservative Party to put forward a serious climate plan, because it is important in the days ahead.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 2:29:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Climate Deny and Mr. Climate Delay strike again. The Corporate Knights' report shows that the Prime Minister is delaying $15 billion that he promised to hard-working Canadians to lower their costs and emissions, yet he has no problem finding $18.6 billion in free subsidies for big oil and gas.
Why is it that the Prime Minister wants to shoulder the burden of the climate crisis on hard-working people and not give them a hand, but wants to give billions of dollars, like the Conservatives, to big oil and gas corporations?
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 2:31:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is true that, every year, we see the worsening impact of climate change, and the costs of extreme weather events are increasingly affecting Canadians, our economy and our country. That is why we are going to continue to fight climate change while putting more money in the pockets of eight out of 10 Canadians. That is a responsible plan to fight climate change and help with the cost of living.
Unfortunately, the Conservative Party still refuses to put out any sort of plan to fight climate change and wants to take away investments that would help Canadians.
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 2:35:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition seems so fond of Mark Carney these days, who actually, as the member says, does believe in a price on pollution. Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition should listen to him.
However, with respect to the premiers, it is important to know that the premiers have every right to submit a plan that actually meets the federal benchmark and to put in place their own price on pollution. That is something that British Columbia has done. That is something that Quebec has done.
Premier Moe was actually here recently and testified before the committee. Premier Moe said that he looked at alternatives to the price on pollution and found every one of them to be too expensive. This is from the guy who had no climate plan, no—
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
