44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 23, 2022 10:00AM
- Sep/23/22 11:26:11 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebec is taking action against climate change: 145,000 people voted in favour of striking all across Quebec to put an end to fossil fuels.
Thousands of people are expected in front of Parliament this afternoon. It is the best place to protest because the federal government is the chief culprit when it comes to climate inaction. Not only is this government refusing to stop consuming fossil fuels, it is encouraging their consumption.
Will the Minister of Environment and Climate Change go meet with the protesters and explain why he voted in favour of Bay du Nord?
99 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/23/22 11:59:17 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, across Canada and around the world today, young people are taking to the streets to demand climate justice. These leaders of tomorrow are clearly expressing their hopes for the future, a future in which we all take responsibility for the damage we have done to our natural world and the climate costs we have imposed on future generations.
Can the minister talk about what our government is doing to tackle climate change?
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/23/22 11:59:45 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Sudbury for her question. In my younger days, I would have been on the front lines of today's climate protests, carrying a banner or a megaphone. I actually organized many such protests myself.
I can assure the House today that my department and this government are fully committed to taking action on all fronts in the fight against climate change. This includes $109 billion in investments and over 100 initiatives in electrification, climate change adaptation and conservation led by indigenous peoples across the country.
Yes, pollution is decreasing in Canada, contrary to what the Conservative Party would have us believe. We are taking action on climate change, and we will continue to do so for the good of all Canadians.
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/23/22 12:02:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, with climate change, the cost of inaction is enormous. In fact, it is in the billions of dollars, and we have a practical and affordable way to lower pollution.
Let us look at the facts. The revenue from pricing pollution in Canada will go back to the provinces where the money was raised, with 90% for families directly and 10% for businesses, municipalities, schools, hospitals and indigenous communities to help them become more energy efficient and save money.
Under our plan, eight out of 10 families will have more money in their pockets, and all the revenue from pricing pollution will stay in the province where it came from.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/23/22 12:12:47 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to present a petition to the House of Commons that has been signed by people in my riding and across Canada regarding the climate crisis.
The petitioners express concerns about our government's commitment. The government signed the Paris Agreement, but it does not appear to be sufficiently committed to meeting the Paris targets of limiting warming to 1.5°C or 2°C. A temperature increase of 1.5°C or 2°C will no doubt spell disaster for our children and grandchildren.
The petitioners specifically ask that the government meet its commitments to ban the export of thermal coal and that they work more aggressively to ensure an end to growth in the oilsands in order to ensure that emissions peak before 2025. We can hold to 1.5°C or 2°C while there is still time.
154 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to Bill C-30 and add my voice to this. I hope I am bringing a bit more light than heat, because I have been listening here for a while and there seems to be a lot of heat but I am not sure how much light there is in it.
I am splitting my time with my favourite colleague from Toronto—Danforth. I look forward to what she has to say and possibly look forward more to what she has to say than to what I have to say.
I also want to extend my concerns to our colleagues and the people of Nova Scotia and the Maritimes generally for what they are facing this weekend.
I cannot help but make the observation of dissonance between what this chamber, particularly on the Conservative side of things, says and the realities of climate change. How many once-in-a-lifetime events do we have to have every year before we realize that climate change is among us? We have been watching the floods in Pakistan. We have been watching the fires out in western Canada and watching California literally burn down. We express sympathy for that. We rush in as best we can to repair the damage after the fact. However, we fail to deal with the fundamental issue that is before us, which is the reality of climate change.
Therefore, the most practical solution is to apply a cost to the carbon that we all put in the air. We all put it into the air, yet we are extremely resistant to doing anything about it. I just want to make that as an observation. There is a dissonance between the way we talk about climate change and the climate emergency, and the willingness to actually make the sacrifices that are necessary in the form of some form of taxation or costing, in order to be able to mitigate the costs.
However, this is a discussion about Bill C-30. It is a bill that, it looks like, enjoys virtually unanimous support in the House. It is one of a suite of measures that the government is taking to fight inflation. I am kind of amused by that language: fighting inflation. I am sure inflation is just scared that the Government of Canada, the governments of the provinces or any government is fighting it, because inflation is what inflation is.
I have found that the members opposite are really quite elegant and eloquent in describing the problem, which is the high cost of groceries, the high cost of fuel, the high cost of rent, etc., and are very able to do that. I have heard it in my own riding. I have found that the answers that I give in my own riding do not resonate. When I say that it is partly due to Putin's war, the response of my constituents is “we do not care”. When I say it is difficulties with supply chains, my constituents say, “we do not care”. When it is having to do with various other causes, my constituents just do not care. The reality is that they want me, us, the government, to do something.
The government actually has a limited array of things that it can do to fight inflation. The first one, of course, is monetary policy. This is generally where everyone nods off who is not already asleep because monetary policy is possibly the most boring thing ever. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your getting an extra coffee before I rose to speak.
Monetary policy is essentially run by the Government of Canada. Years ago, the government made a very wise decision to take monetary policy out of this chamber, out of the political vicissitudes of the day, according to whatever the government or the Parliament of the day thought should be done with monetary policy, so that is run independently.
Some of us can criticize the Bank of Canada, and some members of the opposition in particular seem to be very enthusiastic about criticizing the operation of monetary policy. I could even make the argument that it started to raise interest rates a little slowly. However, it certainly has done what it can do to raise interest rates and restrict the supply of money.
Doing that, however, has consequences. The consequence is that it slows economic activity, and when we slow economic activity, we create unemployment. That is not a very good outcome for any of us, really. That is the consequence of monetary policy, and it needs to be moved forward.
The previous member talked about the government of Mr. Trudeau in the seventies. I was around in the seventies and remember stagflation. Stagflation meant having the worst of both world: inflation plus a high unemployment rate. Fortunately, we are not there, and possibly we have learned something about the application of monetary policy.
That is the first instrument any government has for dealing with this. It is being executed as well as it can be executed, and there has been some impact in cooling the real estate market.
The second array of the government's abilities is fiscal policy. Notwithstanding what some might say, this government is in relatively good shape with regard to debt-to-GDP ratio. I know we ran the debt-to-GDP ratio up during the COVID era, but there are no free lunches in this world and it will need to be dealt with.
At this point, a couple of things have been done well, one of which is buying long-term debt at low interest rates, so the cost of debt, at this point at least, is limited. We also have a reasonable unemployment rate at this point, so there is full employment and a government that has its fiscal house under control, although I would not say in order. There are challenges in managing that, but still, the fiscal situation is not bad for this country.
The third element of any government's approach to inflation is programs. That is part of what we are talking about with Bill C-30 and the temporary increase in the amount of HST refund for those who qualify, which is primarily people with an income of under $40,000 a year.
In my riding, the Canada child benefit is a huge benefit. It is $100 million a year going into my riding, affecting something in the order of 8,000 of families. The money goes to the people who actually need it the most. Economists can make the argument that we are putting money into the economy and are therefore creating our own level of inflationary pressures. There is some truth to that, but if it is a choice between rent and eating, I am sure my constituents appreciate the Canada child benefit, just as they appreciate the rent subsidy, the carbon rebate and the child care program that is going forward.
These are all programs that a government can put forward. It is a reasoned response to a very difficult situation largely caused from outside the country on a relatively small economy.
1204 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/23/22 1:01:52 p.m.
- Watch
I hate to cut off the hon. member but we are out of time.
Continuing debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
