SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 296

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 9, 2024 10:00AM
  • 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
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 11:09:12 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak to an issue that I am sure most Canadians will find the Conservative Party is in want of, which is an actual idea to deal with the price on pollution or the environment. The Conservatives, in fact, are like a fish out of water at times, flopping all over the place. It is hard to actually pin them down. I do not say that lightly. I would like to convey this for my Conservative friends across the way. Let us look back to 2015, when countries around the world went to Paris. One consensus from the Paris conference was that the climate mattered, that there were initiatives that governments around the world should take to deal with the climate crisis. Canada was one of those countries to make that decision to bring in a carbon tax, carbon rebate process to support what had come out of the Paris conference. It was meant to be used as a national backstop. For example, the Province of British Columbia and the Province of Quebec do not have the carbon tax, carbon rebate policy. We have seen some provinces back away from the program they had in favour of the national price on pollution or the carbon rebate and carbon tax. They did that, at least in good part, because they recognized the value of the national program. However, nothing prevents a province from going on its own and developing what the world is demanding, recognizing that we should be concerned about our environment. The price on pollution is a way to deal with that. The Conservatives have agreed with that. Let us look at Stephen Harper's policy platform in 2008. Nineteen members of Parliament in the Conservative caucus today supported that. The iconic leader who they have pictures of supported a price on pollution. Let us fast forward. The last leader the Conservatives, the one the current leader replaced, Erin O'Toole, had a price on pollution as a part of his election platform, and 338 Conservative candidates in the last federal election went around the country with that election platform, making it very clear there should be a price on pollution. There was nothing unique about that. Every political party inside this chamber, the Greens, the NDP, the Bloc, the Liberals and, at the time, the Conservatives, campaigned on a price on pollution. The Conservative Party, with its new shiny leader, talks about axing the tax. The reality is that Conservatives are axing the facts. That is what they are really doing. That is why I challenge the Conservatives, and it is not the first time. Is there a Conservative member of Parliament who is brave enough or has the courage to have that debate? I would love to have a debate with any Conservative member of Parliament, whether it is at a public school in Ottawa or in Winnipeg. I look forward to one Conservative member of Parliament standing up today and saying that he or she will have that debate. Those members are going to have a tough time getting their leader to agree to have that public debate. They do not want the facts. They do not want people to understand what the Conservative agenda really is on the issue, and that should be of great concern. When the leader of the Conservative Party says that they want to axe the tax, it is so misleading. The Conservative members of Parliament know that. The net disposable income of 80% of the residents in Winnipeg North will go down as a direct result of this bumper-sticker policy that the Conservatives are trying to sell Canadians through deception and misinformation, and they do that consistently. We have to wonder where they get this stuff. An interesting article came out, and I would like to bring the attention of members to it because it is really important for us to recognize, saying that the past week they got an extremely revealing look behind the curtains of the leader of the Conservative Party's baloney factory; that first of all, he was accepting major donations from oil sands executives, which is interesting to hear, who they knew were fighting hard against the rules and regulations to clean up their operations; but second, he was outsourcing his communications strategy to Mash consulting. Let us understand who Mash consulting is. Often I talk about the leader of the Conservative Party and his links to MAGA conservativism, the far right. Brian Mulroney said how they had amputated the progressive side of the Conservative Party. Kim Campbell is even harsher in her comments compared to Joe Clark, who says that the Conservative Party has left the progressive nature of its political heritage. Let me read right from it. It states that he is outsourcing his communications strategy to Mash consulting. That is where the Conservatives are going. It is a firm that has close ties to the Premier of Alberta and the Premier of Saskatchewan, but also to companies like Shell and I understand, Canada Proud. Canadians should be concerned about what they see from today's Conservative Party, which has abandoned any sort of progressive heritage. It is not just me saying this; former Progressive Conservative prime ministers are saying what I am conveying here today. The Conservative Party reality is far, far right. It is on the extreme. The Conservatives are more concerned about catering to the People's Party's vote than they are to good, sound public policy. Without any hesitation whatsoever, that is why I have no problem in challenging members of the Conservative Party to go to a public school in Ottawa or Winnipeg. I would love the opportunity to see a person from the media and a classroom full of students, and see how the Conservatives justify their irresponsible policy stand on the issue of a price on pollution. If they were to take me up on it, and I suspect they will not, it would be somewhat of an eye opener. When the Conservatives say that the polls tell them they are right, they have been very successful in deceiving Canadians when it comes to the whole “axe the tax” campaign. They drop completely the rebate portion that increases the disposable incomes of 80% or more of Canadians and at the same time provides an incentive to decrease the use of fossil fuels. However, the Conservatives have no problem doing that. We saw that today when the leader of the Conservative Party stood and gave all sorts of false information. I follow immigration very closely. I was the immigration critic and I can say that the Harper years were not good years for immigration, yet he thinks that those were the best years in Canadian history. He was talking about the jobs. In comparison with Stephen Harper's record, we have well over two million new jobs created in eight years compared to just a million jobs in 10 years. It is misinformation. The Conservatives are misleading constantly in social media and in statements in the House. That is the Conservative Party today, that is the sort of behaviour. I would suggest that the Conservatives are not going to fool Canadians. When the time is here, Canadians will know, and the Conservatives will never be put into a government situation.
1235 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 11:20:25 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the topic of the day is the price on pollution, the carbon rebate and the carbon tax. I can tell the member opposite that our Prime Minister has had more meetings with the premiers than Stephen Harper ever had. I can guarantee that fact. That member is from the province of Alberta. On April 1, Danielle Smith, the Premier of Alberta, increased the gas tax by four cents a litre, which is more than the price on pollution, which was three cents a litre. I am wondering if the Alberta Conservative caucus has told the Premier of Alberta about the damage she is causing to Albertans. I suspect not, because the Conservative Party today is so partisan that it turns a blind eye to anything that comes from the Conservative right to the detriment of Canadians.
138 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 11:34:39 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate many of the comments that the member from across the way has made. One of the things we should be highlighting is the fact that countries around the world make reference to the province of Ontario and how Ontario had the cap-and-trade system but ultimately opted out. From a personal perspective I think that was a backwards step, because there are many American states that have taken it upon themselves to actually put a price on pollution. The United States as a whole does not have a price on pollution; I guess that is fair to say. However, many American states do, and I think that is something worth noting. In Canada, provinces also have the option; Quebec and B.C. are good examples. Could the hon. member just expand upon the importance of other jurisdictions?
142 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 11:49:55 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, one thing I reflected on as I was listening to the member and his colleague who spoke before him was that the one constituency where the Leader of the Opposition has not been able to gain a lot of traction in terms of his position on a price on pollution is Quebec. I think that is because Quebec has had a price on pollution for many years, understands the importance of it and understands how the mechanics of it work. However, what I cannot understand is how Conservatives, in particular, Conservatives from Quebec, keep talking about this price on pollution and trying to demonize the policy. They must know that Quebeckers believe in pricing pollution, whether it be through a carbon tax or through cap and trade. What does the member think about this? Can he wrap his head around why Quebec Conservative MPs keep going on about this, even though they know that Quebeckers, by and large, do not support what they are saying?
167 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 12:59:31 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I look around the world North America, and I see that countries like Germany, Italy, France, or the European Union as a whole, the U.K., or England, Mexico, and a growing number of states in the United States, are bringing in a price on pollution. The Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Green Party all recognize that a price on pollution is the best way to deal with it. Contrary to what the member just finished saying, 80% of Canadians do get more money back in the form of the rebate than they pay for the tax. Having said that, there is an incredible incentive there. Why has the Conservative Party of Canada chosen to intentionally mislead Canadians with false information, in an attempt to have a bumper sticker so that they can get votes by saying “axe the tax”?
149 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 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
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 2:23:23 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has confirmed that eight out of 10 families across the country get more money back with the Canada carbon rebate attached to the price on pollution than it costs them. That is $1,800 for a family of four in Alberta. It is thousands of dollars right across the country. These are things that are helping people with the high cost of living and groceries, at the same time as we fight climate change. What would also be helpful is if we were able to deliver the doubling of the rural top-up to put hundreds of dollars in the pockets of Canadians, but the Conservative Party is blocking the legislation to double the rural top-up.
123 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 2:24:49 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, we did sit down with the premiers, eight years ago, and established the pan-Canadian framework on climate change that both puts a price on pollution and puts more money back in the pockets of eight out of 10 Canadian families in the jurisdictions where the federal backstop applies. That is a way of both fighting climate change and helping with affordability. The Conservative Party is counting on taking away those Canada carbon rebate cheques, but they are arriving this coming Monday, April 15. People will see, in their bank accounts, the Canada carbon rebate that puts more money in their pockets ahead of the costs associated with fighting climate change.
113 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 2:30:34 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, we committed to phasing out inefficient oil and gas subsidies two years ahead of all our partners around the world, and we are going to continue to do that, but it is unfortunate to see that the NDP seems to be falling into the Conservative misinformation trap. Our price on pollution actually puts more money back in the pockets of eight out of 10 Canadian families right across the country, particularly middle-income and low-income families, while we continue to fight climate change. Yes, we developed a way to fight climate change and to reduce emissions while putting more money in the pockets of people, and we are going to keep doing that.
116 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 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!
  • star_border
  • 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!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 2:47:37 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows full well, provinces and territories can put in place their own price on pollution. That is what British Columbia has done. That is what Quebec has done. Those provinces are actually committed to fighting climate change, but the hon. member comes from a province that has no climate plan and no climate targets. The premier admits the price on pollution is the most cost-effective way to reduce emissions, yet he does nothing. That is a shame.
84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 2:50:13 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the whole structure of the price on pollution, as the hon. member knows, is done in a manner that creates an incentive to reduce carbon emissions but does so in a manner that is affordable for Canadians. Eight out of 10 Canadians get more money back. It works in direct proportion to income so that those who live on modest incomes are the best off with respect to carbon pricing. Climate change is real, whether the Conservatives like to understand that or not. Their premiers, Scott Moe and Danielle Smith, have both admitted that carbon pricing is the most effective and efficient way to reduce emissions. Get with the program.
112 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 3:24:52 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, throughout the debate on opposition days, and we have had many opposition days on the very same issue, one of the things that remain constant is the fact that the Conservative Party of Canada continues to want to mislead Canadians on the important issue of a price on pollution. I am wondering if the member could be very clear in his indications and indicate that when they say they are cutting the tax, they are also talking about cutting the rebate, by which 80% of Manitobans receive more money back than they actually pay in the tax, and which has given a very encouraging climate incentive for reducing fossil fuel use.
113 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 3:58:20 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the federal government is increasing the price on carbon to $80 per tonne, and I thought it would be interesting to look at what the biggest emitters in Canada are paying per tonne for their pollution. The Canadian Climate Institute says that the average price they are paying is $4.96 per tonne. That is $80 versus $4.96. Now, before the member for Kingston and the Islands says that consumers get a rebate, etc., etc., the industry gets something much richer than a rebate. It gets $18 billion in subsidies. I bet the industry will get more in subsidies than it pays in carbon pricing. Why does the government keep letting the biggest polluters in our country—
121 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 4:08:48 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the consistency of the Conservative Party is truly amazing. No matter what region of the country its MPs are from, they want to mislead Canadians. Members from the provinces of Quebec and British Columbia should be ashamed of themselves. Quebec and B.C. already have a price on pollution, and so they do not have the backstop of the federal carbon rebate, carbon tax system. When we take a look at it, we are talking about over 10 million Canadians who do not pay the carbon tax, as they refer to it, or receive the carbon rebate. The Conservatives continue to give misinformation no matter where they go. I wonder if there is any humility within the Conservative caucus. Is there not any member who will stand in their place and indicate that this misinformation does a great disservice to the whole concept of a price on pollution?
150 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 4:11:59 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I hope my colleague knows that there is no carbon tax in Quebec. I think that would guide him a bit in his remarks. The Conservative Party is so much the party of big oil and big gas, which have seen their profits increase, that when that party was in power, environmental groups were asking us to keep Conservatives out of meetings, because not only were they not helping, they were hindering the fight against climate change. If Conservatives do not want a price on pollution, if they think pollution should be free, if they think technology works miracles like a magic wand, and if they want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, let them tell us today what their plan is to fight climate change, if they want any credibility. The Conservatives do not want to do anything. All they want to do is give carte blanche to big oil and gas.
154 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 4:52:21 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, ultimately, I would take a look at the carbon rebate and carbon tax issue as more of a price on pollution and an environmental issue. However, I think that we lose that thought. The best way to illustrate the politicization of the issue is to take a look at what is happening in the province of Alberta. One only needs to look at the current premier. Before she was premier, she seemed to be of the opinion that we were going in the right direction on a price on pollution and the impact it was having; she even cited a personal example. Today, she is a premier and one of the individuals who have really focused on getting rid of the carbon rebate or the price on pollution. Could the leader of the Green Party provide her thoughts on the degree to which the politicization of the issue can be very damaging for good, sound public policy.
159 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 4:54:40 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, on the one hand, we are seeing a desire to reduce our carbon footprint, but on the other hand, we are seeing investments in the oil industry, in particular, as well as in carbon capture, which is not very effective. Does my colleague not think that there is a double standard here? Should we not be more consistent in regard to the measures we are taking to fight pollution so that we can become a world leader and keep other countries from making the same mistakes we made?
90 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border