44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 29, 2022 10:00AM
- Sep/29/22 10:04:29 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition from constituents and others who are extremely concerned about the climate emergency. They note that the House carried a motion that we are in a climate emergency, in June 2018. Constituents note that this requires that we act as if we are in an emergency, something that has not happened yet.
The petitioners call on Canada to address the climate emergency by reducing emissions by at least 60% below 2005 levels by 2030; making substantial contributions to assist the developing world or, as the petition refers to, countries in the global south; winding down the fossil fuel industry in such a way that ensures workers and communities are protected from any economic dislocation; providing good green jobs and an inclusive workforce; strengthening human rights and worker rights; expanding the social safety net to ensure decarbonized public housing and operational funding for affordable and accessible public transit nationwide; and paying for the transition by increasing taxes on the wealthiest and big oil and financing through a public national bank.
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:36:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands.
I could not be more opposed to this opposition day motion. I am not sure how they could pack more falsehoods into one short motion, but they have certainly done their best.
It is a privilege to rise in the House today to speak to this motion, although I am opposed to it. These past few years have not been easy with the pandemic and its impacts, and now we have the war in Europe and the rising cost of living. It is easy to point fingers and call out for quick solutions, but it is reckless to take advantage of the challenges communities across Canada and the globe are facing.
In recent years, climate change has had unprecedented effects on Canadians. Impacts from climate change are wide ranging, affecting our homes, cost of living, infrastructure, health and safety and economic activity. Of course, we have seen disruptions in our supply chains and how that contributes to inflation right across Canada in all of our communities.
The latest science warns that, to avoid severe impacts of climate change, greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced significantly and urgently to limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5°C. However, in taking action, it is no longer a question of choosing between our economy and climate action. It is well understood that the two go hand in hand and that the long-term health of our people, our planet and our economy depend on our taking ambitious climate action. That is what Canadians want to see. They want to see that from the government, and they want to see that from the opposition parties. They want to see us raising our level of ambition and not backing off and going backward, as the Conservatives would have us do, into the Harper era of inaction.
Let us look at some of the actions that our government is taking. In April 2021, the Government of Canada responded to the latest science by submitting a strengthened national emissions target of 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030, in addition to its goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. In March of this year, the government released the 2030 emissions reduction plan, outlining how Canada will meet our 2030 target. The plan builds on a strong foundation, starting with Canada's first-ever national climate change plan in 2016 and then our strengthened plan, which was released in 2020. I could not be more proud of the work that this government did in consultation with provinces and territories right across the country in order to develop our climate action plan. The plan shows that we can build a cleaner economy while making people's daily lives better.
Carbon pricing is central to all of these plans because it is the most efficient and lowest-cost policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I know members on the opposite side do not believe that carbon pricing is the way to go, but there are many case studies and examples across the world that show it is by far the most effective system for incentivizing the type of behaviour we need to see and the type of innovation we need to see in order to get to a sustainable economy.
We have heard from stakeholders across the country that consistency and predictability are key to unlocking investments in the low-carbon economy. We also know that businesses and industries are developing innovative technologies and approaches to reduce emissions, including carbon capture. There are many other technologies out there. There are many renewable energy projects and things that we can be investing in. They need clear incentives and supports to put those technologies into practice. That is what our government's plan intends to do and is actioning.
Carbon pricing creates those incentives without dictating any particular approach. It lets businesses decide how best to cut their emissions. Let us remember that, if they do not pollute, they do not pay a carbon price.
At the same time, Canadians, especially the most vulnerable Canadians, are facing affordability challenges. We get that. The federal approach to carbon pricing is designed to maintain the consistency demanded by industry and investors while prioritizing affordability for Canadians. We know it is not enough to create a cleaner economy. We have to make sure that Canadians can afford it as well.
It is true that carbon pricing of pollution is modestly increasing fuel costs, by about 2¢ per litre of gasoline this year. We know every bit counts, but carbon pricing has never been about raising revenues or raising prices on Canadians. In fact, under our plan, most households end up with more money in their pocket than they pay.
Wherever federal fuel charge proceeds are returned directly to households, eight out of 10 families get more back through the climate action incentive payments than they pay in direct carbon costs, meaning the system is helping with the cost of living for a majority of Canadian families.
Let us remember, just this July, Canadian families got the first quarterly payment, which was a double payment. In Ontario, they are getting $745 this year, and they got half of that. I noticed that come into my bank account. I am sure many other members of the House and their families noticed that direct quarterly payment from the climate action incentive.
Members on the opposite side cannot claim that those dollars, 90% of those funds, are not going back to Canadian families, because they got those payments in their bank accounts.
It is lower income households that benefit the most. High income households tend to spend a lot more on fuel and energy, so they will face a net cost. However, the lowest income Canadians come out the furthest ahead.
For example, the average cost impact of carbon pricing per household in Alberta is expected to be about $700 in 2022, but this is less than the average climate action incentive payment of about $1,040 per family.
In Ontario, the average household cost is estimated to be about $580, but households will receive back, on average, about $710 to $745. These estimates take into account the direct costs, like paying more for fuel, and also indirect costs, like paying a bit more for goods and services.
Families in rural and small communities are eligible to receive an extra 10%. Households can use these funds however they want. They can use them to absorb the extra 2¢ per litre of gasoline if they choose. Households that take action to reduce their energy use come out even further ahead.
Zero-emissions vehicles are an option, with federal purchase incentives helping reduce the cost. The federal government is also supporting home energy retrofits, through the Canada greener homes grant, to reduce energy used in the home, save money and cut pollution all at the same time.
The Government of Canada has also committed to return proceeds collected from the federal output-based pricing system, or OBPS, to the jurisdictions of origin. Provinces and territories that have voluntarily adopted the OBPS can opt for a direct transfer of proceeds collected. Proceeds collected in other backstop jurisdictions will be returned through the OBPS proceeds fund aimed at supporting clean industrial technologies and clean electricity projects.
Climate change is a serious challenge, but it is also an opportunity, a very big economic opportunity. Canadians want to take advantage of the significant economic opportunities in the low-carbon economy. Analysis by the global commission on the economy and climate estimates that transitioning to a low-carbon economy will deliver a direct economic gain of $26 trillion U.S. and generate 65 million new jobs globally.
Just as we are putting a price on carbon pollution, we are also making historic investments in clean technology, innovation and green infrastructure to drive growth and reduce pollution, including $9.1 billion in new investments to cut pollution and grow the economy as part of the 2030 emissions reduction plan.
The 2030 emissions reduction plan, Canada's next steps to clean air and a strong economy, reflects submissions from over 30,000 Canadians, provinces, territories, indigenous partners, industry, civil society and the independent net-zero advisory body. The plan represents a whole-of-society approach, with practical ways to achieve emissions reductions across all parts of the economy.
Canada is not alone, by any means, in fighting climate change and pricing carbon pollution. Around the world, markets are changing, industries are moving away from products and services that create carbon pollution and are turning to cleaner and more sustainable options. The cost of inaction on climate change is enormous, and it is far greater than the cost of addressing it today.
As emphasized in the most recent IPCC report, the cost of inaction is—
1490 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 2:12:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the new Conservative leader will put the people first: their paycheques, their savings, their homes and their country.
The carbon tax is an utter failure. We know this, and there are two ways to measure it. The first is whether it has reduced emissions. It absolutely has not. The second is whether it puts money back into the pockets of Canadians. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has been unequivocal on this. Most Canadians lose money as a result of the carbon tax, yet the Liberal government is pushing forward with tripling the carbon tax by April 2023. I guess the environment minister and the Prime Minister are experiencing the carbon tax differently than average Canadians.
Help is on the way. A Conservative government, led by our new leader, will cut the carbon tax.
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 2:36:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the B.C. price on pollution, as the minister calls it, has not reduced emissions, and the rebates do not go back to British Columbians. They go to the NDP government in Victoria. What he would see is the tripling of the carbon tax, which would result in the $2.25 going to $3 a litre. We will never accept that.
Why will he not cancel the tripling of the carbon tax and stop gouging British Columbia families?
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 2:37:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the hon. member that if he has a problem with the fact that British Columbia does not rebate the money back, he should have a conversation with Premier Horgan. At the end of the day, the rebate system that is in place wherever the federal backstop is in place provides more money back to people than they actually pay. The vast majority of Canadian households receive more money back.
With respect to his point about not reducing emissions, I suggest he look at some of the academic studies, including one from Duke University, which show that it actually does reduce carbon emissions.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 2:37:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberal logic claims that the carbon tax will reduce emissions, but the reality is that the Liberal carbon tax has had no meaningful impact on the environment. The carbon tax has succeeded only in driving up the costs of food, fuel and home heating. While their tax hikes dive deeper into the pockets of Canadians, it is more than just inflation that is making it even harder to make ends meet.
Will the Prime Minister abandon his carbon tax hike, or is his goal truly to make the most basic necessities unaffordable?
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 2:38:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would say that certainly the issues of affordability are extremely important to every member in this House and to all Canadians. That is why the government has acted to address affordability issues.
With respect to some of the statements regarding the price on pollution, I suggest that the hon. member do a bit more homework. There are 45-plus countries around the world that have implemented a price on pollution. Virtually every academic study tells us that it is the most effective and efficient way to reduce emissions. In Canada, emissions dropped by 9% in the last reported study, so what she is saying in the House is simply not true.
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 2:55:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, certainly the issue of affordability for Canadians is one that concerns every member of the House. This government has acted to ensure that we are addressing the affordability issue.
With respect to the price on pollution, if we asked 100 economists, 99 will tell us that it is the most efficient way to reduce emissions and incent innovation. It is a market-based approach. Market-based mechanisms are something the Conservative Party used to believe in and, certainly as recently as 10 months ago, every member on that side of the House campaigned on putting into place a price on pollution.
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 3:36:31 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member for Northumberland—Peterborough South is quite concerned with the carbon tax. It is recognized by leading economists as the most efficient way to act on the climate crisis. It went up by just 2.2¢ this past year.
Meanwhile, the federal government has announced a new $8.6-billion tax credit for carbon capture and storage, a technology that has led to increased emissions 32 of the 40 times it has been implemented around the world. Is the member not similarly concerned about this amount of public funding going to carbon capture? Would he not want to see that go toward proven climate solutions?
110 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 3:37:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am mindful of the public accounts committee where I asked the environment commissioner if the government had hit one single emissions target. The answer was a clear no. What is the signature policy of the Liberals to get emissions down? It is the carbon tax. The proof is that this policy is failing.
56 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 3:51:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the carbon tax is going to be tripled. Not only can Canadians not afford it, but it actually does not work. It does not reduce emissions. It is not a solution. It is not a climate plan. It is a tax plan. The member opposite ought to understand that.
We are open to solutions that will actually help people. We have brought forward a solution to help people, and that is to stop the tax hikes the government is planning for January 1 and April 1. That will put more money back in the pockets of Canadians, and that will put us on the right economic path, not the wrong one.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 3:53:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer says that 60% of Canadians in Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario get less than they pay for the carbon tax. It does not work. It does not reduce emissions. The Liberals actually voted against scrapping the GST off fuel costs. We had that opposition day. They already opined on that. The GST on top of a carbon tax is squeezing Canadians to the point that they cannot afford to get to work, they cannot afford to drive their kids to school and they cannot afford to drive a car.
95 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 4:11:40 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I heard my hon. colleague admit that Canadians are hurting, so I invite her to cross the floor and come over to join the fight to put more money back into Canadians' pockets.
I also heard her explain that, basically, the Parliamentary Budget Officer absolutely does not have a clue. That is pretty much what she said.
Right now, the United States, with no carbon tax, has falling emissions, and Canada, with a rising carbon tax, has rising emissions. I would like my hon. colleague to explain that sort of twisted, inverse relationship. It is not making sense to me and it is not making sense to Canadians. Could she explain that to us, please?
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 4:56:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Bloc is very concerned about the environment and believes that the carbon tax actually cuts emissions, but I read this in the Toronto Sun: “The Americans, without a national carbon tax, reduced [their emissions] by 21%. Canada, with a national carbon tax, reduced [their emissions] by 9%.” When we are talking about this, we are talking about making sure the carbon tax does not triple, because we are worried about the affordability crisis that Canadians are facing.
Could the hon. member explain to me how supporting a national carbon tax, which does not cut emissions but increases the price of food, is a good policy going forward for Canadians in all provinces?
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 4:57:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
I have a few things to say to him in response.
First, I would love to analyze and study the impact of the Liberal government's carbon tax. This tax will increase gradually, and it is set to triple by 2030, not right now when we are in the middle of an inflationary crisis. What will be the actual, concrete impact on the price of food and the cost of living? We have to study that in order to put a figure on the results. I think the impact will be much lower than indicated.
Now I would like to ask my colleague if he acknowledges that human activity contributes to climate change. If so, does he agree that Canada should honour the Paris Agreement, which requires us to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions? If the answer is yes, what would his plan be? My concern is that this government's plan will not even enable us to honour the agreement.
My colleague spoke of the national policy. In closing, I would like to remind him that the English Canadian nation is not my nation. Quebec's national policy is the carbon market, which, by the way, was created by a Liberal premier, one Jean Charest. Therefore, Quebec is not subject to this government's carbon tax. Since we have a different system and a different model, we are not affected by these changes.
243 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
