SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 114 - Oct/20/22

Mr. Chris Bittle (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.)

Oct/20/22 3:20:07 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was disappointed by the hon. member's speech because I only got to hear the last two minutes, but I am hoping he can talk about a former Conservative government that tackled acid rain with a price on pollution, how that worked and why the Conservatives will not learn from their own past.

56 words

All Topics

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Oct/20/22 3:20:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Brian Mulroney spent a decade pushing the U.S. government to improve legislation to control acid rain. When George Bush came along, he agreed to it and adopted what Brian Mulroney, a Progressive Conservative, had been pushing for a decade. Let us just think about that. Brian Mulroney had a massive impact and effect on environmental policy throughout North America. That was a Progressive Conservative government. Unfortunately, what we have here is something completely different. There is no possible remnant of Brian Mulroney and the representative from my area, Flora MacDonald, left in what is across the way.

100 words

All Topics

Ms. Joanne Thompson (St. John's East, Lib.)

Oct/20/22 3:21:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to take part in today's debate. Indeed, our government is acutely aware that rising prices are being experienced around the world and that Canadians are not exempt, but at this point the hon. opposition should also be aware that carbon pollution pricing is not the problem. In fact, most households will get back more through climate action incentive payments than they pay due to federal carbon pollution pricing. The federal carbon pricing system is not about raising revenues. All direct proceeds from pricing carbon pollution under the federal system are being returned to the provincial or territorial jurisdictions in which they were collected. Among households, eight out of 10 get back more than they pay, so putting a price on pollution is not the problem. It is a solution and an effective one. It is a market-based mechanism that actually was initially proposed by Conservative economists, but for the official opposition, it is ideology over expertise every time. They have been fighting climate action for years in Canada. Today, we face literally billions of dollars in cleanup and adaptation costs from extreme weather events that are stronger and more frequent because of climate change. Conservatives vote against every measure our government brings forward to improve affordability for Canadians, whether it is the child tax benefit, pandemic relief, dental care or a temporary GST break. Now the Conservatives pretend to be on the side of those facing energy poverty. Canadians have been riding the roller coaster of volatile global oil and gas prices for years, and Conservatives have said nothing about skyrocketing profits for oil and gas producers. The only way to eliminate energy poverty, to reduce household energy costs in Canada and to have true energy security is by fighting climate change. With the volatility of oil prices and record profits for oil companies, Conservatives are proposing Canadians be chained to the oil and gas markets and completely vulnerable to foreign wars and cartels. Because the problem Canadians are facing is global, caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, our government has been steadfast in delivering targeted and fiscally responsible financial supports to help Canadians through these challenges. We know that many are experiencing the rise in the cost of living through higher food prices and rent, and we know that this poses a particular challenge for lower-income Canadians, who are more vulnerable to these effects. We are supporting Canada's most vulnerable by doubling the GST credit for six months. That is why we have taken action to put more money back into the pockets of those who are most vulnerable. Bill C-30, which just received royal assent on Tuesday, offers a perfect example of how we are doing this. By doubling the goods and services tax credit for six months, Bill C-30 will roughly deliver $2.5 billion in additional support to roughly 11 million eligible low-income people and families, including more than half of Canadian seniors. This will mean up to an extra $234 for single Canadians without children and up to an extra $467 for couples with two children. Seniors will receive an extra $225 on average. With Bill C-30 now law, these extra GST credit amounts will be paid starting in early November as a one-time lump sum payment through the existing GST credit system to all current recipients. Current recipients do not need to apply for the additional payment. They will receive it automatically. If individuals have not filed their 2021 tax returns already, they should do so to ensure they are able to receive both the current GST credit and the additional payment. Eligible Canadians who already received the GST credit will automatically receive their payments starting in early November. I would like to take a moment to look at some examples of what this will mean to some of our most vulnerable neighbours, in real terms. Under the present GST credit, we know that a single mother with one child and a net income of $30,000 will receive $386.50 for the July through December 2022 period, and another $386.50 for the January through June 2023 period, but with Bill C-30 she will receive an additional $386.50. In total, she will be receiving about $1,160 this benefit year through the GST credit. What is more, Bill C-30 is just one example of how we are helping the most vulnerable Canadians. We have also introduced Bill C-31, which would provide a Canadian dental benefit starting this year. This would be for families with children under 12 who do not have access to dental insurance and who have an adjusted net income of less than $90,000. Those families would be able to access direct payments totalling up to $1,300 per child over the next two years, up to $650 per year, to cover dental expenses for their children under 12 years of age. It is expected that 500,000 Canadian children could benefit from this targeted investment of $938 million. Bill C-31 would also provide a one-time top-up to the Canada housing benefit. This one-time payment of $500 would be available to applicants with an adjusted net income below $35,000 for families, or below $20,000 for individuals, who spend at least 30% of their income on rent. It is estimated that 1.8 million low-income renters, including students who are struggling with the cost of housing, would be eligible for this new support. For the Canadians who need this support the most, the most vulnerable Canadians, this would mean new money for them this year, at exactly the right time. The measures in Bill C-30 and Bill C-31 would complement previous actions taken by our government and are providing help this year to support those who are most vulnerable through the current challenges. We have enhanced the Canada workers benefit. We will have cut child care fees in half by the end of this year. In July, we increased the old age security by 10% for seniors 75 and older. For post-secondary students, we have doubled the Canada student grant until July 2023. With these and other recent measures, a couple in Ontario with an income of $45,000 and a child in day care could receive about an additional $7,800 above their existing benefits this fiscal year. A single recent graduate in Alberta, with an entry-level job and an income of $24,000, could receive about an additional $1,300 in new and enhanced benefits. A senior in Quebec with a disability could benefit from over $2,700 more this year than they received last year. Helping our most vulnerable through the current challenges is the right thing to do. We know our government can tackle affordability and climate change at the same time. In fact, climate action and reducing dependence on volatile global oil and gas prices set by foreign cartels and overseas conflicts are the path to eliminating energy poverty once and for all. We know that a price on pollution is the most economically effective way to fight climate change. Canada's carbon pricing system is recognized by experts and institutions around the world, including the IMF, as being a model for other countries to follow.

1237 words

All Topics

Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC)

Oct/20/22 3:31:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member studiously avoided actually speaking to the motion. The motion is very specific. We are trying to express Parliament's will here in expressing our support and agreement with the comments of the Liberal Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador and calling on the government to exempt all forms of home heating fuel from the carbon tax for all Canadians. Will the member vote for this motion and with her premier?

73 words

Ms. Joanne Thompson

Oct/20/22 3:32:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, being a member from Newfoundland and Labrador, I am very pleased to say that I support the government's action that we not back down on climate policy. The tax is necessary to support a green economy. Climate action is essential, and carbon tax is a component of that. I work closely with the provincial government and look forward to continuing that relationship.

65 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

Oct/20/22 3:32:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to acknowledge my colleague, who sits with me on the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development and for whom I have great respect. The Bloc Québécois agrees that polluters must pay and that there must be a price on pollution. However, in April, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development wanted to determine whether this measure really targets a significant proportion of greenhouse gas emissions. He concluded that it did for individual emissions, but not for those of large emitters. Does my colleague not think that there is work to be done on that, to ensure that large emitters also pay their share?

114 words

All Topics

Ms. Joanne Thompson

Oct/20/22 3:33:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I certainly support the government's policy that a carbon tax is absolutely essential to managing the climate crisis. We have to take bold action. We will continue to address the need to bring emissions down to a level that is in line with our targets of 2030 and 2050. It is important to remember that as the rate of pollution tax increases, so does the rebate.

69 words

All Topics

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Oct/20/22 3:34:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, earlier this week, the Alberta Federation of Labour brought forward a report on what it would look like to have a just transition for workers in Alberta. The member talked a lot about the boom-and-bust economy and certainly my family, as a family that has been involved in the oil and gas sector for some time, understands the challenges of that boom-and-bust economy. However, we did not get clarification from the government this week if it would be supporting the calls of Alberta workers for a just transition for a future economy for workers. Could the member comment on that?

106 words

All Topics

Ms. Joanne Thompson

Oct/20/22 3:34:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am always very proud to talk about the work this government is doing to support Canadians, to support workers. There is a plan in place for a just transition, and I can speak to this from my own province. We are moving ahead to ensure that our workforce is ready to move into the reality of low-emission technology, which will power the world as we move forward. I am very pleased with the work the government is doing and I am proud of the work it is doing to support families. We will continue to be there for workers and families as we move forward.

109 words

All Topics

Mr. Jasraj Singh Hallan (Calgary Forest Lawn, CPC)

Oct/20/22 3:35:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to follow up on a question that my colleague, the member for Calgary Shepard, asked which the member refused to answer. Does the member stand with the Prime Minister, her leader, who is punishing her constituents and those who live in her province? Because of bad economic and energy policies, her province alone has seen a 52.8% increase in fuel oils. Otherwise does she stand with her Liberal premier, her constituents and follow what the Conservatives are trying to do to help save on home heating bills for her constituents?

95 words

Ms. Joanne Thompson

Oct/20/22 3:36:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am very proud of the relationship that the federal government has maintained with the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I am very proud to say that since 2019, Newfoundland and Labrador has received $8 billion in support from the federal government. I think that speaks for itself.

50 words

Hon. Michael Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC)

Oct/20/22 3:36:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent. The government is completely out of touch, and I do not say that lightly. There is a crisis unfolding in rural parts of our country, in Ontario, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, a real crisis, a crisis the government is ignoring. Here is the crisis. Ten per cent of Canadians heat their home with heating oil or with propane. That is 3.8 million Canadians. About a million and a half households in our country heat their homes during the cold Canadian winters with heating oil or with propane. That is a third of Canadians living in Atlantic Canada. That is over a million people living in the province of Ontario. They heat their homes with oil or propane, and the vast majority of them heat with oil. What many people do not realize, and what the government certainly does not realize, is that these Canadians are in dire straits. They are facing a crisis this winter. The one out of 10 Canadians who relies on heating oil or on propane is going to be bankrupted by the cost of heating his or her home this winter, and here is why. Traditionally, 90% of Canadians heat with heat other than heating oil or propane. They either use natural gas or some form of alternative. However, here is the reality for those 10% of Canadians who use heating oil or propane. For a house that is heated with natural gas, for every dollar of heat that house uses in natural gas, for that same house located in an area where there is only heating oil or propane, it costs three dollars, three times the amount, to heat with propane and it costs four dollars to heat with heating oil, or four times the amount. These figures I give to the House are before the global energy crisis that has hit global economies over the last year or so. This winter the figures now facing the 10% of our fellow citizens who heat with propane or heating oil are truly frightening and that is why this is a crisis. I went on the website yesterday of West Nova Fuels of Nova Scotia, and I will quote from its website: [O]n average a typical house with four people in it should burn about three to four tanks of oil in a year to heat your home and hot water, about 2800 litres of oil. That is now much it takes to heat a typical home in rural Ontario and rural Atlantic Canada: 2,800 litres. I went on the website of a company called Crescent Oil in rural southern Ontario that services much of rural southwestern Ontario with heating oil. Its current price for the cost of a litre of that heating oil is $2. Some areas of rural Ontario and rural Canada have even higher per-litre costs for heating oil. Canadians will understand that if they are told that number two heating oil is diesel. That is what furnace oil heating oil is. If people have driven around in Ontario in the last week or so, they will see that the price of diesel fuel is at record high levels because of shortages of distillates and other heavy crudes, and it is selling for about $2.35 a litre now in Ontario. Therefore, it is no coincidence that heating oil, which is diesel, is selling for $2 a litre. That is $2 a litre for 2,800 litres over a winter. That is $5,600 to heat a typical home in rural Ontario or rural Atlantic Canada. That is before the carbon tax and the HST. There is a carbon tax of roughly 13¢ a litre on that heating oil. There is HST not just on the base cost of the heating oil, but also on the carbon tax, so that $5,600 it is going to cost to heat one's home this winter in rural Ontario or rural Atlantic Canada actually is closer to $6,739, of which $375 is the carbon tax. The government's rebates do not cover these costs. A typical four-person family, mom, dad and two kids, living in these rural areas, heating with heating oil and driving to work in a two-income family and putting 25,000 kilometres a year on each vehicle, because there is no public transit in rural areas, which is the very nature of living in a rural area, will consume about 5,000 litres of gasoline in a year. As well, in Ontario there is an 11¢ a litre carbon tax on that gasoline. That means someone who is paying about $550 a year in carbon taxes for commuting, and add to that the $375 they have paid on their heating oil to keep their home at a minimal temperature of about 19°C or 20°C, is looking at $925 a year in carbon taxes just on commuting and heating. That is not to mention all the carbon taxes that are embedded on shipping, groceries and other costs. The climate rebate of $204.88 a quarter, for a total of $819.52, does not cover the cost. Out of the government's own admission, and we heard it from the previous member, two out of 10 households in this country do not get more back from the rebate than they pay in carbon taxes. The government is ignoring those households and ignoring the crisis facing these households. It is ignoring the astronomical skyrocketing costs it will take to keep one's house warm in rural Ontario and rural Atlantic Canada this winter. The argument that this is somehow working as part of a plan to reduce emissions to combat climate change is bunk. Here is the proof. Liberals have not met a single target. They came to office saying that they were going to meet Copenhagen. We blew through that without meeting that target. They said that they are now on track to meet Paris, which is total baloney. Emissions have been rising under the Liberal government. In 2016, the first full year the government was in office, emissions were 715 megatonnes. In 2019, the last year before the pandemic for which we have data, emissions rose to 738 megatonnes. Now, they dropped in 2020, but shutting down the economy is no way to combat climate change and reduce emissions. I will go out on a limb here. I believe that in 2022, Canada's emissions will blow through that 738 megatonne level to a record high for the government. Do not take it from me; take it from Bloomberg. I was reading the news this morning and I came across an article Bloomberg just published today entitled “[The Prime Minister] Defends Canada's Minuscule Climate Progress”, with the subheading, “A bevy of climate policies championed by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have not yet translated into steep pollution cuts in the country.” I want to quote from that article—

1193 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Oct/20/22 3:45:32 p.m.
Watch

I want to remind the hon. member he is not to mention the Prime Minister or anybody else by first name or last name, even if he is quoting an article. The hon. member has one minute and 17 seconds to wrap up.

43 words

Hon. Michael Chong

Oct/20/22 3:45:46 p.m.
Watch

My apologies, Madam Speaker. I got caught up in the moment and I made a mistake. I withdraw that. I want to quote from this article, because it is damning. It reads: But all of Canada’s peers in the Group of Seven, or G-7, have managed to achieve economic growth while simultaneously cutting emissions, and Canada’s environmental commissioner says the country is struggling to bend the emissions curve. Among the Group of 20 major economies, or G-20, Canada ranks behind only Saudi Arabia when it comes to per capita emissions, and ahead of Australia. That is a damning indictment of how the government's climate change policies are working, including its carbon tax. I will finish by saying that this is the only government in the G7 that has raised taxes on fuel during a period of record high global energy prices. Even the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador is pleading for relief. The government needs to get in touch with Canadians and understand that 10% of this country is in dire straits facing a heating crisis this winter. It needs to do the right thing and cut the taxes on propane and heating oil.

201 words

All Topics

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport, Lib.)

Oct/20/22 3:47:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, before many of us ever got involved in politics, I would say that we looked to the member for Wellington—Halton Hills as a beacon of hope in the Conservative Party with respect to fighting climate change. We saw him as the only leadership contestant in a race who was willing to talk about and acknowledge climate change. He, at the time, I believe, was a proponent of carbon pricing, a strong proponent of strong action to fight climate change. Lately, the Conservatives have been telling us to cut the tax, cut the tax, cut the tax, not acknowledging that supreme courts across the country have said that it is not a tax, that it is a rebate program and it is actually helping many families who have made many adjustments to their usage of fossil fuels. Many of my constituents also use heating oil and many of my constituents also use propane. The methodology of the member opposite is not going to help fight climate change and, frankly, it is not going to help our constituents in rural Halton either. Does the hon. member still believe in fighting climate change with carbon pricing?

197 words

All Topics

Hon. Michael Chong

Oct/20/22 3:48:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what I proposed in 2016 was, in fact, a revenue negative carbon tax. I even said at the time that I did not support this government's carbon tax quite simply because it is revenue positive. Not all of the money is returned to taxpayers. The government has used it for a plethora of programs that are not working. In fact, the government admits it itself. It says that 20% of households do not receive more back in these rebates than they pay in carbon taxes. What I proposed is nothing of the sort of what the government is proposing. Its plan is not working and the proof is in the pudding, as reputable news organizations like Bloomberg are pointing out.

123 words

All Topics

Ms. Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné (Terrebonne, BQ)

Oct/20/22 3:49:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. He criticized the government for being out of touch. That surprised me, considering that the opposition motion would reduce the cost of heating, but not until April. We all know people do not heat their homes as much in April. This Conservative Party proposal is contradictory in many ways, and it is disappointing, frankly, because it does not elevate the debate in the House. Why does my colleague think his party moves motions that offer little in the way of solutions? So many more useful things could be done for our constituents.

101 words

Hon. Michael Chong

Oct/20/22 3:49:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. I disagree with her. The carbon tax already applies to petroleum products for households and consumers in Ontario and other parts of our country. The carbon tax is already in place and the figures I quoted were not for the increase that is slated to come in on April 1 of next year. They are for the carbon tax that is already in place and has been in place for a number of years that was increased on April 1 of this year. These are the costs households are facing this coming winter. We are calling on the government to provide relief to these households, as many other major economy governments have done and cut the taxes on these fuels so that households will not face either freezing in the dark this winter or potential bankruptcy.

145 words

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

Oct/20/22 3:51:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, definitely people are worried about upcoming heating bills. My question for the member is about fair taxation. Does the member believe there is a lot of work to do to close the loopholes here in Canada for the ultrarich and corporations that are making outsized profits during this pandemic?

51 words

All Topics

Hon. Michael Chong

Oct/20/22 3:51:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, one of the things we can do to help disparity in this country is to reduce the tax burden on the most vulnerable households, many of whom live in rural Atlantic Canada and rural Ontario, many of them in older housing stock that was built before 1980 that are facing extraordinarily high heating bills this winter. I think that would be a good place to start, and I encourage all members of the House to vote for the motion in front of us.

85 words

All Topics