SoVote

Ken Hardie

Member of Parliament
Member of the panel of chairs for the legislative committees
Liberal

Fleetwood—Port Kells
British Columbia
Voting Attendance: 68%
Expenses Last Quarter: $140,090.09

Government Page

Context: House Hansard - 321 - May/30/24

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

May/30/24 12:51:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague is very articulate and eloquent, but she missed a few points. With the kind of tax cut that Conservatives are talking about, somebody would have to burn almost 1,300 litres of gasoline over the next three months for that to really make sense. There are a couple of other things. We could do without the rebates, which is a consequence of axing the tax, but what a lot of people do not remember is that 40% of the excise taxes collected in Canada go back to municipalities to help them with infrastructure. I know this from my days in metro Vancouver at the transportation authority because we benefited from that. Is that also something she would give up? Would she be prepared, as well, to contemplate somebody doing a “Danielle Smith” or the big oil companies just simply raising their prices to take up the space left when she cuts the tax?

159 words

Context: House Hansard - 294 - Mar/22/24

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

Mar/22/24 12:05:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, Canadians expect their government to take action on climate change and address affordability issues. Putting a price on carbon while sending rebates to Canadians is the most cost-effective way to fight climate change. Affordability is front and centre in this system, which puts more money into the bank accounts of Canadian families. Can the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change share with the House how the Canada carbon rebate helps Canadians?

78 words

Context: House Hansard - 267 - Dec/13/23

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

Dec/13/23 5:41:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, can the hon. member comment on the fact that a business, such as a trucking company that moves food, pays a price on pollution or a carbon tax but gets a rebate, and as an input cost, it also gets to deduct that from the amount it earns as a company? Does that not, in the member's opinion, really negate the argument that somehow a price on pollution is behind high food prices today?

77 words

Context: House Hansard - 265 - Dec/11/23

Mr. Ken Hardie

Dec/11/23 12:17:41 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-56

Madam Speaker, that question highlights two things. First of all, the strategy generally used by the government has been to ensure that the people who need the help get it. That is the reason, for instance, that we took the Canada child benefit away from millionaires and made it income tested so the people who actually needed the help got it. In the case of the grocery rebate, that could not have come at a better time because things such as the Competition Act and this act are all meant to relieve the pressure on people and fix things that are wrong in the market system, and the grocery rebate was something that helped to bridge people earing very low incomes over the hump while all of these elements came together for Bill C-56. I would not discount, perhaps, the need to do that again at some point in the future. I would advocate for it as an individual MP. Of course, it is up to the government to assess the situation and move forward. Bill C-56 is meant to solve the problem for which the grocery rebate was a band-aid on a wound that needs healing.

200 words

SoVote

Member of the panel of chairs for the legislative committees

Ken Hardie