SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 100

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 22, 2022 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 100 - Sep/22/22
Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)
  • Sep/22/22 2:24:39 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, in this House it is important to look at the facts, and the facts are that, when the Leader of the Opposition was the minister responsible for employment insurance, premiums were 20% higher for workers than they are now. That is right; workers paid 20% more. That is why we are continuing to move forward to support workers. On the issue of the CPP, we promised to be there for workers as they become seniors to help them with their retirements, and that is exactly what we did. In regard to pricing pollution, we promised it would no longer be free to pollute anywhere in this country, and it no longer is. That is what we are focused on.
121 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 100 - Sep/22/22
Mr. Terry Duguid (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)
  • Sep/22/22 3:05:43 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives used to believe in market mechanisms and pricing to reduce pollution. Stephen Harper did before he did not. The member for Durham did before his party abandoned it and, in fact, abandoned him. The Conservatives have flip-flopped all over the place. However, I want to applaud one Conservative, the member for New Brunswick Southwest, who says his province should go back to using the federal carbon price because at least it comes with rebates. I agree with that hon. member.
85 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 100 - Sep/22/22
Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)
  • Sep/22/22 4:51:26 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-30 
Madam Speaker, I will start with a couple of things. First, I heard the member say that no other trading partner has a price on pollution or a “carbon tax” as he referred to it, which is not true. Fourteen out of 31 of the OECD countries do tax pollution, including Japan, the United Kingdom and France. The member also talked at great length about the price on pollution or a carbon tax in B.C. However, my understanding is that B.C. has its own carbon tax. Indeed, B.C. is not utilizing the carbon tax that is imposed, because it chose to do its own model, which was the premise of this entire exercise of pricing pollution, so the member is slightly perhaps misleading by making that comment. Finally, at the beginning of the member's speech, he talked about the supports that would be put in place as a result of the bill, but that perhaps spending this money would add further to inflation. I do not reject the economic theory behind that. I recognize that he said he is going to be supporting the bill, but is he suggesting that we just abandon people because if we spend any new money on them we are just adding to inflation? Is his suggestion that, because it will contribute to inflation, we should just not spend money on people?
233 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border