So V ote

Context: House Hansard - 245 - Nov/2/23

Jan/29/24 2:13:19 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Mr. Speaker, over the holidays, I heard how after eight years of this NDP-Liberal government, Canadians are struggling to pay their bills and keep roofs over their heads. They know that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. Our leader, my Conservative colleagues and I are back to show Canadians they have a simple choice in the next election. On the one hand they can have a costly coalition of the NDP and Liberals that takes their money, taxes their food, punishes their work, doubles their housing costs and unleashes crime and chaos in their communities or they can choose the common-sense Conservatives and our common-sense plan. We are back to address the priorities facing Canadians, starting with a focus on passing Bill C-234 to take the carbon tax off farmers and to bring food prices down. Our priorities are clear: axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Let us bring it home.

164 words

Context: House Hansard - 235 - Oct/19/23

Nov/2/23 4:08:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there was a lot of talk about hypocrisy in this debate, but maybe the member opposite could help me understand something. For eight long years, we have been listening to the Liberals try to justify a carbon tax based on driving people to lower their carbon footprint, but then they take the tax off heavy oil and continue to punish people who are using lower-carbon fuels like propane, natural gas or electricity. Could the member help me understand this ridiculous policy the Liberals have come forward with?

90 words

Context: House Hansard - 232 - Oct/16/23

Oct/19/23 1:38:54 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-55 Bill C-50 Bill C-48

Madam Speaker, I am rising today to express my serious concerns about Bill C-50. This bill is called the sustainable jobs act, which is typical of what Liberals do. They pick a name that sounds good. Who does not like sustainable jobs? I like sustainable jobs. I think all Canadians want sustainable jobs. It sounds really good, but the problem is that in this bill there is no plan to create sustainable jobs. This is a plan to get a plan. The bill outlines how the Liberals are going to put together a council. Based on past behaviour, I suggest that it would be highly paid Liberal insiders who will get these jobs and advise on what the plan ought to be. As to the timeline of when they are going to come up with what the plan ought to be, it be should by 2025, coincidentally just after the next election. The Liberals do not have a plan. Nothing says there is no plan like a bill that is introduced to get a plan. That is the first thing. The second thing is the Liberals have another role, a secretariat, that is going to do some coordination, with another highly paid Liberal insider when they get the plan. The problem is that is it; that is all. It is a plan to get a plan, with some principles that are motherhood and apple pie and that we would all agree on, such as well-paying jobs, caring about the environment and the need to respect labour, all of these good things. They are all motherhood and apple pie, but the bill does not have a specific action that is going to help. On the other hand, it is going to hurt. The analysts of the government have said that Bill C-50 would kill 170,000 direct Canadian jobs, would displace 450,000 workers directly and indirectly working in the energy sector and would risk the livelihoods of 2.7 million Canadians across all provinces. The bill would destroy as many as 2.7 million jobs when there is not a single action in it to create any sustainable jobs at all. That is a problem. The other thing is that it is going to cost a lot of money. Right now the energy sector provides 10% of Canada's GDP and pays over $20 billion in taxes to all levels of government every year. Last year, $48 billion in royalties and taxes were contributed by the energy sector. This bill purports to get rid of that by eliminating the sector. We can look at other places in the world that have come up with a sustainable jobs plan and are starting to implement it, Scotland being one example. If we took the cost per person of its plan and did the equivalent thing here, it would cost $37.2 billion. The Liberals are taking away as much as $48 billion and adding a cost of another $37 billion. If we do the math, they are increasing by greater than $70 billion the loss to the Canadian economy. I do not know why the Liberal government cannot learn the lesson when countless people can, like former Liberal John Manley, who said that when it runs these huge deficits, it is putting a foot on the inflationary gas pedal, which is causing the Bank of Canada to put its foot on the brake with higher interest rates. This raises the cost of mortgages. Canadians are suffering from coast to coast, so definitely not only is the bill not going to create jobs, but it will come with a huge cost. It is not like this is the first time there has been an attack on oil and gas and the energy sector. This has been a continual theme from the time I got elected in 2015. Let us start with the tanker ban, Bill C-48, to keep Canadian oil from getting out there when everybody else's ships are out there full of oil. Then we had Bill C-55, which created marine protected areas so we could do no oil and gas development there. Then there was Bill C-69, the “no more pipelines” bill, which was just called unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. All of these things were intended to be a war against creating oil and gas projects. There is evidence. When the Liberals took power, there were 18 LNG projects on the books and there were four pipelines. Zero pipelines have been built and all the LNG projects but one are cancelled. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, our friends in Germany were going to give us $59 billion to replace their Russian oil and coal with our green LNG. The Prime Minister said there was no business case, so Australia took that deal. Then Japan came up with a similar deal and again we would not take the deal, so Saudi Arabia took it. Then came France and the Netherlands. There were all these opportunities for Canada to be a leader, supplanting higher-carbon fuels with our green LNG, the most responsibly produced product in the world with the best human rights record, but again the Liberal government refused. Instead, it is focused on its own ideology and things that it wants to do that continue to destroy the economy. We can talk about the electric vehicle mandates. That was another great idea. Let us give away $31 billion to create 3,000 jobs. For those who can do the math, if we just gave each of those 3,000 people $10 million, they would never have to work again and there would not be any footprint. There is a total misunderstanding of how to create a growing economy. Then there is the clean electricity standard, another hugely divisive bill that was introduced by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, clearly not understanding that where the Liberals want to go with all the electric vehicles, electricity and the grid would require building the equivalent of 19 nuclear facilities, like the one from Bruce Power. They cannot build anything, so I do not know where they get the idea that they are going to be successful in achieving that. At the same time, they are ignoring the fact that only 7% of the public even wants an electric vehicle because the technology is not there. No one wants to be trapped in a snowstorm at -30°C because the batteries do not work. They catch fire. In addition to that, they do not have a very long range. Instead, the government decided to pick a winner and loser with the battery plants that are being built. Now Toyota has come out with a solid-state battery, with a 1,275-kilometre range, that works at -20°C and does not catch fire. That will make our technology obsolete, with $31 billion after the fact. Maybe the Liberal government needs a few more engineers so that it can actually make science-, fact- and data-based decisions, but that is not what is happening today. The Liberals continue to move ahead with the carbon tax and the second carbon tax, putting punishment on the backs of Canadians and achieving nothing. Emissions have gone up under the government. At the 2005 level, we were at 732 megatonnes. We needed to get to 519 and now we are at 819. They are not achieving their targets and keep putting bills like this in place, talking about sustainability, the environment and creating jobs. They are not actually achieving that. Sarnia—Lambton has a huge oil and gas sector, but it knows how to do a transition and is doing a transition. It is creating good-paying, sustainable jobs like the ones at Origin Materials, a net-zero plastics plant in my riding. My riding has one of the largest solar facilities in North America. There is a whole bio-innovation centre that is growing different kinds of bio-facilities that are all either carbon sinks or carbon-neutral. These are the kinds of actual solutions and actions we need. That is not what is in Bill C-50. It is a plan to get a plan with nothing else. For that reason, I will not be supporting Bill C-50.

1396 words

All Topics

Oct/16/23 2:13:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would get groceries prices down before Thanksgiving. Well, the turkey has come and gone, and groceries prices are not down. Another broken promise from a Prime Minister who is not worth the cost. Maybe he was talking about American Thanksgiving. I can tell members that putting together a committee of Liberals to recommend how to bring prices down is a wasted effort. They have no plan. After eight years of this NDP-Liberal government, Canadians are out of money and this government is out of ideas. Our Conservative leader would axe the tax, the second carbon tax, the tax on the tax and the tariffs on Canadian farmers, and cut the regulations that are adding cost to the food chain. Conservatives know how to talk turkey and Canadians need the hope that we are bringing.

143 words

Jun/1/23 1:42:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is important to note that Conservative policy is typically set by the grassroots, and our policy has always been to oppose a carbon tax. Members can remember we had a leader with a different vision, and he is no longer the leader. Members can take what they want from that. We have always been opposed to a carbon tax. The grassroots members are opposed, and they are opposed because they know it does not work. Even the cap and trade program in Quebec has not reduced emissions. It does not work, so we need to get technology solutions in place. We will come up with a plan. We are expecting an election pretty soon, and if the NDP would do its part and help push the Liberals for a public inquiry or pull the agreement, we would be there with our plan.

145 words

Jun/1/23 1:39:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, let me talk as a chemical engineer about some of the things I have seen that are very effective at reducing emissions. When I was the director of engineering at Suncor, for example, we had emissions reduction programs in place for all the refineries. We were able to reduce our GHG emissions by 25%. We were basically capturing the emissions and recycling them. Then there is carbon sequestration. Canada is a leader in this technology. It is a great carbon sink. That is a way of getting there. In terms of energy, 40% of the energy in Ontario is nuclear. Of course, nuclear is carbon-free, so expanding into small modular nuclear reactors, especially in the emerging world, which is on coal and heavy carbon fuels, is a great idea. I also mentioned LNG supplanting coal. It is a lower-carbon fuel and is environmentally responsibly produced here.

150 words

Jun/1/23 1:37:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it would be my pleasure to correct that. Basically, if we build all of this LNG capacity to ship fuel to other places in the world, it will increase our footprint from 1.6% to about 3.2% to 3.6% depending on how much we build. However, it will reduce the overall global footprint by 15% by getting places like China and India and the emerging world off of coal. We go up by less than 2% and the world goes down by 15%. That is a noble goal.

92 words

Context: House Hansard - 179 - Apr/18/23

Jun/1/23 1:28:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise in the House and especially today for this opposition day motion, which talks about how the first carbon tax would increase the price of gas by 41¢ a litre and how the second, the clean fuel regulations, would add 20¢ more to that when sales tax is included. This will further exacerbate the cost of living issues that people are facing across the country. What I want to do today in my speech is talk about what the carbon tax will do, talk about what it will not do and talk about what real solutions should be offered. First of all, what does it actually do? It increases the price of things. It is not just the price of gasoline that is going up, because it is an escalator. For example, if we look at food, it has increased in price, on average, by 12%, but some items of food are up 30% and 40%. When we are talking about a farmer who is producing the food, they will have to use more diesel and fuel to heat their barns and take care of growing their products and drying them. There is a carbon tax on that. To make it worse, there is a tax on the tax. The Liberals are applying tax on top of that, and it is a substantial amount of money. We are talking about $150,000 for a farmer. That is a real thing that they obviously have to pass on to the consumer. Then they are shipping the product to a processing facility, and there is a carbon tax on that and a tax on the tax. Then at the processing facility, depending on the type of processing facility, there is a carbon tax on emissions. Then we are talking about shipping it to the grocery store. Again, that is another carbon tax and a tax on the tax. Then we get to the grocery store, and it has to be put in refrigerators. If the Liberal do not buy them, that is another expense, but then they are spending more energy trying to keep the products preserved. What is happening is this is hurting individuals. Before the pandemic, the data reported said that half of Canadians were within $200 of not being able to pay their bills. Let us think about that. Then fast-forward to where we are now, where we have added a second carbon tax that is estimated, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, to cost each individual $538 a year. Half of Canadians were within $200 of not being able to pay their bills every month, and now the Liberals have added $600 more. That is on top of the estimated cost of the already existing carbon tax, which the Parliamentary Budget Officer says, depending on the province we live in, is between $1,500 and $3,000 a person. By the time all these taxes, carbon taxes and the tax on the tax get to an individual, we are talking about $4,000 per Canadian. That is a substantial amount of money. If we break that down by month, we are talking $300 a month, which puts us way over the 50% of people who could not pay their bills if they had an increase of $200. The Liberals are going to say that Canadians get back more than they give, but we know that is not true. I have seen my climate action rebate cheque come to me, $128.55 four times a year. Adding that up, it is nowhere near $4,000. It is absolutely a misrepresentation of the facts to say the government is giving Canadians more back. No, it is not. I am getting calls at my office, continually, from individuals who are saying they cannot afford to pay their bills and are losing their house. I have a lot of seniors in my riding, and some of them have had to go back to work at 74 years of age in order to afford heating, gasoline, groceries, the whole thing. That is what the carbon tax is doing. It is adding to inflationary pressures that we already have from the out-of-control spending happening on the other side. That is what the carbon tax does. Let us talk a little about what it does not do. It does not reduce emissions. It is a tax plan; it is not an emissions plan. If we look to who has met their Paris targets, our neighbours to the south have met their Paris targets, and they did it through emissions reduction technology and switching to fuels like nuclear, LNG and lower-carbon fuels. These are actual, concrete solutions. They put capital incentives in place so that businesses would put emissions reduction technology in place. That is how they did it, and they did it in four years. If we look at where we are, we were supposed to reduce our targets by 30% from the 2005 level. The 2005 level was 732 megatonnes and we are now at 670 megatonnes. In 20 years, we have reduced 60 megatonnes, but the target we have to get to is a reduction of 538. We are nowhere near the plan. In the approach the Liberals have, they talk about tree planting. They are going to plant two billion trees. Do members know how many trees we already have in Canada? We have 318 billion trees in Canada and this is two billion more. More trees are always better, but the reality is that recent reports said the Liberals have planted less than 2% of these in years. It is because the program that was introduced does not work. I know a great group, Climate Action Sarnia-Lambton, that wants to plant trees. I approached the minister and said that we have lots of volunteers who are willing to come out. They have all the tools. We just need the money to get the trees and get them in the ground. Do members know what I heard? We have to plant 10,000 trees or we cannot get any money. We have to start somewhere with a program that works a little better than that. That is what the carbon tax does not do. I have heard this a lot in the discussion today during the debate: Well, what about the wildfires and what about the floods? We are seeing severe weather events and we are seeing them at a frequency that we have not seen before. However, Canada is less than 2% of the carbon footprint of the world. We could eliminate the whole thing and we are still going to get all of those wildfires and all of those floods, because we have countries, like China and India, that are building coal plants. China is 34% of the footprint. What would be better is if we exported Canadian LNG. We could reduce the global footprint by over 10%. We could reduce five times our existing footprint. That is real climate action. Instead, 12 LNG projects have been shut down by the Liberal government. The Germans approached us. Germany decided to go down the green energy path, and they found out that it was so expensive that they got rid of it and went back onto coal and LNG. They approached us to get a contract with us for $58 billion, which we refused. The Australians used to have a carbon tax. They got rid of it. It made everything more expensive and it did not help them meet their goals. We have a situation where countries are in need of our fuel. We are the most environmentally responsible producers of LNG in the world, but we cannot get anything built because a Bill C-69 project approval thing was put in place. We have seen the disaster that the government is making with the Trans Mountain project. It was supposed to be $7 billion and is up to $30 billion, and it is not even built yet. The carbon tax hurts Canadians. It inflates their costs. People cannot afford to live. They are struggling. I know that Liberal MPs are hearing this from their constituents and they need to listen. What we need to do is have emissions reduction technology, get on lower-carbon fuels, export them to the world and work together to get a better planet. That is what we need to do and that is the vision on this side of the House.

1431 words

Context: House Hansard - 159 - Feb/13/23

Apr/18/23 3:03:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, maybe the minister should do something because he has never met an emissions target. Another day and another billionaire island boondoggle. This time, the Prime Minister jets off to Jamaica and costs the Canadian taxpayers over $160,000. Of course, he stays with a friend who has donated to the Trudeau Foundation because he is so independent from that foundation. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Canadians cannot afford a vacation. They cannot afford to eat and heat. Will the Prime Minister end this double standard of living and axe the carbon tax?

94 words

Context: House Hansard - 159 - Feb/13/23

Feb/13/23 2:34:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the reality is the Liberals have never met a single one of their emissions targets. They do not have an environmental plan; they have a tax plan. The minister's answer is no help at all to John in my riding. John is struggling with the rising cost of gas, groceries and home heating. At 74 years old, on a fixed income, he has had to go back to work. Will the Prime Minister axe the tax so John can keep the heat on?

86 words

Context: House Hansard - 117 - Oct/25/22

Feb/13/23 2:32:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let us skip the fantasy. I am a numbers girl, so here are the numbers: eight long years under the Prime Minister, 40-year highs in inflation and food prices up 10%. Now the Liberals are going to triple the carbon tax. Do members know what that adds up to? It is 67. That is the percentage of people who think Canada is broken. Will the Prime Minister take responsibility for breaking the country, or will he get out of the way and let us fix it?

89 words

Context: House Hansard - 111 - Oct/17/22

Oct/25/22 3:02:37 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member is in deficit fantasy land. Our leader and our party have been calling for weeks for the Liberals to cancel taxes on Canadians, yet the Liberals are still planning to triple the carbon tax. I am going to ask this again today: Will they stop their punishing plans to increase the carbon tax and drive up the cost of gas, groceries and home heating, yes or no?

71 words

Context: House Hansard - 107 - Oct/4/22

Oct/17/22 2:50:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, analysts are saying that home heating prices in some places will increase by 300% this winter. That is triple. The Prime Minister's planned increases to the carbon tax and the payroll tax are cold-hearted actions. The Liberals are literally freezing Canadians out. Is it just inflation or will the government cut its planned taxes?

58 words

Context: House Hansard - 106 - Oct/3/22

Oct/4/22 5:39:33 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-30

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives will always support lower taxes and putting more money back into the pockets of Canadians, but I wonder why the government brought forward the idea in Bill C-30 that with one hand it is going to give some money back to Canadians, but with other hand it is going increase payroll taxes and the carbon tax and take that money back. Would the member please explain why the government is doing that?

77 words

Context: House Hansard - 103 - Sep/27/22

Oct/3/22 2:10:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the new Conservative leader will put the people first: their paycheques, their savings, their homes, their country. The carbon tax is an utter failure. The Liberal government would have us believe that it will drive emissions down, but emissions have gone up under its tenure. B.C. has had a carbon tax for 14 years and its emissions have gone up four megatonnes. Quebec has had a similar program for 12 years and its emissions have gone up four megatonnes as well. The reality is that the carbon tax drives the price of everything up and it is punishing on Canadians who can least afford it. The Liberals would have us believe that they will get more money back than they pay, but the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said this is false and many Canadians will pay more. Still the Liberals are planning to triple the carbon tax in April of 2023. Clearly the Prime Minister is experiencing the carbon tax differently than hard-working Canadians. Help is on the way. A Conservative government with its new leader will scrap the carbon tax.

185 words

Context: House Hansard - 103 - Sep/27/22

Sep/27/22 12:05:12 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the carbon tax is not working, but the Liberal government still plans to increase the tax and force Quebec to increase its tax too. What does my colleague think of that?

33 words

Context: House Hansard - 83 - Jun/7/22

Sep/27/22 10:50:58 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I do feel I need to correct the record, because there are many errors in the speech of the parliamentary secretary The first is the claim that the Conservatives do not have any targets for climate change and emissions reduction. In fact, the Liberals' targets are Stephen Harper's 2030 targets, so that is not the case. The member said that we did not have a plan. Our leader outlined technologies such as nuclear, carbon sequestration and carbon capture, and leveraging LNG to other places in the world that would help reduce the footprint by a factor of 10. Why does the Liberal government keep telling Canadians things that are simply not the case, such as they were only going to pay $50 a tonne for carbon tax or they were going to get more money back than they invested? Why does the Liberal government continue to do that?

151 words

Context: House Hansard - 51 - Apr/1/22

Jun/7/22 5:41:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak to our opposition day motion because the cost of living is the number one issue in this country. It is unbelievable to me to think that a year ago 60% of Canadians were within $200 of not being able to pay their bills every month. Let us think about the increased costs that have happened during the pandemic and the multiple carbon tax increases from the government in the middle of a pandemic when people were losing their jobs, not to mention the exacerbation of everything under all of these COVID mandates, which are driving the cost of supply chain activities up across the country. All of these things are fundamental to the increased cost of living. I am hearing from constituents in Sarnia—Lambton who are calling me, and it is heartbreaking. I have John, who is 73 years old. He is retired and has had to go back to taking two jobs to make ends meet. His wife is suicidal, thinking about the fact that they cannot afford to live. That is one story, but there are many others I could go into. This is all for what? If we look at what is in the motion today, there is a lot to unpack. I am only going to focus on a few things. Let us start with the carbon tax. I heard the member of the Green Party talk, and his facts were not on point. Eleven cents a litre is the increase that we have had to date, and it is going to get worse. We know from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the tax on gas is 25% of the issue. The government has the power to do something about this today. France and Japan have eliminated taxes on gasoline, recognizing there is a shortage in the world and the price is high. This is something that could be done today. However, the government continues to not just increase the carbon tax but to have a tax on that tax. There is huge revenue for its coffers, but the average Canadian is suffering. What did we really achieve for climate change out of this? We have achieved nothing, absolutely nothing. The Liberals have never met a climate change target. B.C. has had a carbon tax for 12 years, and its emissions have not gone down. Quebec has had a program for 12 years, and its emissions have not gone down. The government's emissions have not gone down, but it is punishing Canadians by continuing to raise the price on carbon tax, which is driving up not only the cost of gasoline but also of everything that has to be transported using gasoline. We hear disinformation and misinformation on a daily basis in the House. The Liberals stand up and say that 80% of Canadians are better off, but that is not what the Parliamentary Budget Officer said. He said that 60% of Canadians are worse off with the carbon tax, and by 2024, 80% of Canadians will be worse off. We need to be honest with Canadians as they can see, when they are filling up their tanks and when they are paying their bills, that the costs are going up. On the topic of the vaccine mandates, I very much appreciate the importance of vaccines to prevent COVID-19. I appreciated, in the heart of the pandemic, the many measures that were put in place. However, 55 countries around the world have dropped the mandates. The World Health Organization has said this is no longer effective for fighting Omicron or any of the current variants, yet the Liberal government continues to have these mandates in place. That is causing a shortage of all kinds of employees across the country. Truck drivers are just some of many. They were already short 14,000, and then with the mandates that increased. I had women from the Canadian Federation of Truckers explain to me that one truckload of butter used to be $7,000 when they picked it up in the U.S. That is now $14,000, and that cost gets passed right on to the consumer. That is the reason why, when people go to the grocery store, single moms, seniors on a fixed income, and all of the people who are living below the poverty line, they do not have the ability to absorb it. I know the Prime Minister does not care. He has his trust fund. He does not have to worry about his bills. He is not concerned about the money. The Prime Minister is punishing Canadians with these failed policies. It is not just individual Canadians. Let us talk about tourism. We visited today with the duty-free folks. They saw a 95% drop in the revenue of their businesses due to the border mandates. Instead of lifting the mandates, like all the other countries are doing, the Liberal government has doubled down and extended them into the heart of the tourism season. It is totally unacceptable, and it is accomplishing absolutely nothing. Most of the people in the House have had all their vaccines, and all of them have had COVID one or two times. I am double vaccinated, and I have had COVID three times. It is not an effective technique, and these restrictions are causing problems at the airport and problems at the land border. It is impacting tourism and costing Canada economic activity. Those are things the government could change with the stroke of a pen. With the stroke of a pen, it could help the tourism industry and drop those mandates. They are accomplishing nothing. We see the hypocrisy, when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health stands up on the issue of ferries and says that, as long as someone's journey is less than 24 hours, they can be unvaccinated. The member for Cumberland —Colchester asked how many flights in Canada are less than 24 hours. The answer is all of them, so I ask why the mandates are not being dropped. This is killing economic activity, and it is hurting Canadians. This is something the government could do immediately. That is the kind of solution that is in this motion. We are saying to put politics aside. This is the last chance before we rise for the summer. Let us get it right. Let us work together, and let us drop the mandates to get back to good economic activity. I must not leave without talking about the farmers and the government's punishment of farmers. I understand the war of Russian against Ukraine. Everybody in the House has stood in solidarity to say we need to help Ukraine and we need to put sanctions against Russia, but it was clearly pointed out to the Minister of Agriculture that fertilizer was already purchased by Canadian farmers, and they have already paid the money to the Russians. The Russians already have the money, and now Canadian farmers are getting a 35% tariff. That is hundreds of thousands of dollars they are having to pay, and we have asked the Minister of Agriculture to exempt them back to March 2, but the government has refused. Do the Liberals not understand where food comes from? There is already a concern globally about food security. Ukraine is one of the major suppliers of wheat in the world. The whole supply chain of food is at risk, and when Canadians farmers could be increasing their production, what is the government doing? It is punishing them, not just with prices of fertilizer and the tariffs on that, but also with the carbon tax on heating their barns for their animals and running their equipment. There is no relief in sight. It is totally unacceptable. I would say that, when it comes to other things the government could do, it tries to pretend that, even though inflation is at an all-time high in the last 30 years, it is somebody else's fault. I have just pointed out things it could do about the carbon tax and the tax on the tax, and things they could do for farmers. What about affordable housing? It is simple. It is all about supply and demand, so we have to increase supply. The government has had seven years to address housing affordability, and what did it accomplish? It doubled house prices. That is utter failure. Young people cannot ever have a dream of owning a house right now, and while there are solutions that our party has put forward, which the government could take advantage of, it has instead chosen to create a savings account that is tax free. Do Liberals not understand that young people do not have any money to save? This is a totally fruitless exercise. It is not going to change anything. Some of the housing minister's programs that were put in place were taken advantage of by 9%, or perhaps nine individuals. I cannot remember. That is a failed plan. There are thousands of young people across the country who want to revisit the dream of owning a house, but the government has let them down. My hope is that Liberals are going to look at this motion and look at the specific things they can do today to cut costs for Canadians because they are at the breaking point. It is my plea that Liberals will vote with us on this motion and that they will take these actions, because we need to be there for Canadians. Everybody in the House was elected to stand up and serve Canadians, and I want to see action from the Liberal government.

1629 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 41 - Mar/4/22

Apr/1/22 12:04:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the NDP-Liberal government continues to try to destroy the oil and gas industry in Canada. First it had the carbon tax, then the clean fuel standards and now a call for a 42% emissions reduction. My riding of Sarnia—Lambton, which produces a third of the petrochemicals in the country, will be hard pressed to remain competitive under these punishing rules that do not apply to foreign oil. The carbon footprint would not be leaving the planet; it would just be leaving Canadian jobs. Why are the Liberals trying to destroy thousands of jobs in this country in order to give them to foreign producers with higher emissions?

112 words