So V ote

Context: House Hansard - 131 - Nov/21/22

Feb/14/23 12:27:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about several different things. Today we are talking about taxes and the government's massive spending that does not make much sense. We think that energy sources should not be subsidized, full stop.

38 words

Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC)

Nov/21/22 2:45:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, no one is taking that minister's advice. No one in Atlantic Canada wants to see home heating fuels double this year. Nobody is asking the federal government to make heating more expensive. The Liberal carbon tax is fuelling inflation. Even the Governor of the Bank of Canada says so. It is driving up the price on energy. It is driving up the price on food. It is driving up the price on life. When Ontario, Alberta and New Brunswick were able to reduce taxes on gasoline and home heating fuels, we saw prices go down. Under the government, they are going up because it keeps raising the carbon tax and it is going to triple it. They need it to stop.

124 words

Context: House Hansard - 131 - Nov/21/22

Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC)

Nov/21/22 2:43:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, according to Statistics Canada, families in Atlantic Canada are hardest hit by the Liberal's carbon tax on home heating fuels. On a year-over-year basis, families in New Brunswick are paying 50% more to heat their homes. It is up over 75% in Newfoundland and Labrador. The Liberals believe heat pumps will solve this energy crisis, but their carbon tax is already forcing families to decide between heating and eating. When will the Liberals do the right thing, cancel their carbon tax and give families in New Brunswick and Atlantic Canada the break they need this winter?

101 words

Context: House Hansard - 122 - Nov/1/22

Nov/1/22 12:24:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there are a number of areas where we think the Liberal government is wasting money. I do not completely agree with my colleague. In my opinion, we need to support our energy sector so that prices remain affordable for consumers. So far, we have the carbon tax and regulations that are constantly driving up the cost of energy. If we come up with solutions that will drive up prices, then prices are going to go up. Finally, with regard to our King, I do not think that is a priority for Canadians or Quebeckers. That is a debate for another day. I say “long live the King”.

111 words

All Topics

May/17/22 1:51:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, earlier today, when I attempted to state what I thought was the NDP's position clearly, the member for Timmins—James Bay yelled that I was lying. He told the House that Canada can decide whether our children have a future or whether we are going to continue to have cheap gas. I should not have to point to his words or my words to request an apology. I would like him to withdraw the remark that he made that somehow members of this side, myself in particular, are lying for pointing out what the NDP is in fact saying today in the House of Commons.

109 words

All Topics

May/17/22 1:06:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is what qualifies as not being honest in the House, apparently. One moment the member says that we cannot have affordable, cheap gasoline, and when he is called on it, he says that he did not say that. In fact, it is exactly what the NDP is saying. What is the NDP's position? Does the NDP want high gasoline prices, which means Canadians are going to pay, or does it want gasoline prices to come down so that Canadians get a break and we have affordable prices?

91 words

Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC)

May/17/22 1:05:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have a question for the member. We are hearing the NDP speak out of both sides of its mouth. The member, maybe in a moment of honesty, said she is concerned about high gas prices. This morning, I asked the member for Timmins—James Bay about gas after he said we cannot have affordable gas prices, and he got up and he said that was wrong—

71 words

Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC)

May/17/22 10:54:21 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's honesty in saying that he opposes affordable gasoline for Canadians. He wants high gas prices. My question to the member is this: Why will his partners in the Liberal government not also claim victory on this? The Liberals brought in the carbon tax with the stated purpose of raising gas taxes at the pump. That is what happened. Now they are running for cover and blaming it on Russia. I will give members one example. In my riding, a litre of gasoline is $2.00 a litre. Across the border, 10 minutes away in Maine, it is $1.50. That is a 50¢ difference. Now, all that gasoline comes from the same place, which is the refinery in Saint John, New Brunswick. Maine does not have a more efficient refinery with harder workers or lower input costs. It is coming from the same place. That difference is all tax. I would say it is mission accomplished, as they are driving up the price of energy in this country. Why will the Liberals not also claim credit on this and say, “Mission accomplished”?

192 words

Context: House Hansard - 72 - May/16/22

Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC)

May/16/22 2:34:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the objective of Canada's carbon tax is to make gasoline more expensive. The Liberal member for Halifax even said there needs to be pain at the pumps. Well, mission accomplished. The difference in pump prices between southwest New Brunswick and northeast Maine after the exchange rate is 50¢ per litre. It is $2 in my riding and $1.50 in Calais, Maine. Since New Brunswick's oil refinery supplies both countries with pump gasoline, that difference is all tax. Why are the Liberal ministers and the Deputy Prime Minister not taking credit for making energy more expensive? It is precisely what they want.

107 words

Mar/3/22 4:45:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that was another great question. Sadly, our allies in central and eastern Europe were far more aware of the dangers of Russia than our friends in western Europe, and in fact, even too many in the foreign policy establishment here in Canada, but we can move today. We cannot undo what was done but we can move forward. There is a proposal in Newfoundland and Labrador to take advantage of their natural gas resources, which would be the closest point to Europe and the best partner for Europe to meet some of its needs for natural gas. As well, the large LNG facility in Saint John, New Brunswick, is currently an import facility. There are plans to reverse it so that it will be an export facility. Again, it is closer to Europe than other points on the Atlantic coast. We should move forward as partners with Europe, taking full advantage of our strategic resources to ensure that our allies are strong and protected, and that countries like Russia are not able to threaten them and weaken their positions because they supply resources and places like Canada do not.

191 words

All Topics

Mar/3/22 4:43:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that was another very good question. In fact, when I sat on the government's side of the House, I was part of a government that moved to restrict China's ownership of vital Canadian resources. This is an area the current Liberal government failed to act on. We are now seeing rare earth mineral companies being bought out by state-owned enterprises. That should stop. I also believe, though, that if companies operate in this country, we should be able to monitor their activities to ensure they are not working against Canada's national interests as well. I would support moves to do that when it comes to China's ownership.

114 words

All Topics

Mar/3/22 4:42:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada and its allies are looking for ways of preventing the oligarchs from profiting from our economy. I agree with my colleague. Canada’s plan must emphasize our industry, our workers and the resources we can sell to our friends in Europe.

48 words

All Topics