SoVote

Dec/5/22 12:14:38 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, I will not apologize, but I will stand up proudly and say that Canadians across the country understand the damage and inefficiency of the carbon tax. Not only do they believe it should not increase, but it should not triple. If we want to talk about broken promises under the Liberal government tabling legislation, former environment minister, Catherine McKenna, who is no longer a member of the House, promised Canadians, under the Prime Minister, that the carbon tax would not go above $50 a tonne. The Liberals have broken their promise and will triple it to over $170 a tonne. The government should be apologizing for breaking its promise and raising the cost of living on Canadians. The Conservatives are standing on the right side of the issue and we are seeing that in the momentum we are getting across the country with this message.

147 words

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Eric Duncan

Dec/5/22 12:18:08 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, no, the Conservatives do not believe that the failed carbon tax is working. If we look at the metrics that the Green Party has itself, we have a carbon tax that has been increasing every year since it came into effect. We were told that emissions would drop when the carbon tax came in. Emissions have gone up every year and they will continue to do so. The government still has not tabled a plan to meet any of the targets it has set. We can make progress on lowering emissions through removing gatekeepers and by enabling technology, not taxes, to be the solution. There is a lot—

111 words

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings—Lennox and Addington, CPC)

Dec/5/22 3:00:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Liberals do not have an environmental plan. It is a tax plan. Liberals have not met a single target that they have set. As is typical with the government, I got another non-answer. I asked for a yes or no response, not more empty rhetoric. I will provide the government with another opportunity to answer the simple question: Will they cancel the carbon tax, yes or no?

70 words

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. John Nater (Perth—Wellington, CPC)

Dec/5/22 3:01:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Canadians do not need a DeLorean to know how much of a failure the Liberal government has been when it comes to the environment. It has not met a single target or planted a single tree, but it has raised the costs on everyday Canadians. It is making it $1,400 more costly to buy groceries this year and another $1,100 per family next year. There are 1.5 Canadians who relied on a food bank in a single month and half a million of those were children. All of this is being driven up by the Liberal carbon tax. Will the Liberals do the right thing and remove the carbon tax?

115 words

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

Dec/5/22 3:39:26 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Mr. Speaker, the party on this side exercises common sense. The fact of the matter is that the carbon tax is driving up the cost of food and everything else. It is time that the members opposite give Canadians a break so that we can afford to have a Christmas dinner, instead of trying to keep warm and deciding whether to pay the electricity bill or to put food on the table.

72 words

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Dec/5/22 4:23:07 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of his speech, my colleague talked about carbon capture and sequestration. That is something very close to my heart. In Saskatchewan we had one of the largest scale working facilities in the world. It has taken the equivalent of millions of cars off the road over the years it has been functioning. It was a large investment by the Government of Saskatchewan and has done a lot to clean up the environment in Saskatchewan. The Petroleum Technology Research Centre said Saskatchewan has had the highest reduction in emissions in the country, and a lot of that is because of the carbon capture and sequestration technology. In my colleague's earlier comments he said that was not true. I am wondering, in the spirit of not sharing misinformation, if he could come to the realization, as my NDP colleague should as well, that carbon capture and sequestration is a good way to keep our environment clean and still produce much-needed fertilizer and fuel that we need to feed the world.

175 words

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Mike Morrice

Dec/5/22 4:24:14 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to restate what I said earlier, which is that globally, 32 out of 40 times that carbon capture has been implemented, emissions have gone up. The fact is that this is an extremely inefficient technology. It is a huge risk and the government should be investing in proven climate solutions. They are right in front of us. Helping Canadians retrofit their homes and insulate their attics are the most efficient ways to reduce emissions. If those in the oil and gas industry think carbon capture is such a lovely idea, I would encourage them to invest their own funds but not to use taxpayer money for it.

112 words

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Dec/5/22 5:11:19 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' carbon tax rhetoric never fails to surprise me. Let me point out that this tax does not apply in Quebec. To hear my Conservative colleagues tell it, the carbon tax can be blamed for everything from the temperature to a Canadiens win or a Bruins loss. I have a hard time seeing a connection between fighting poverty and the carbon tax. Even the best economists have not found a way to explain inflation in simple terms, but the Conservatives have it figured out: It has everything to do with the carbon tax. I have a question for my colleague. She says that we need to put people first, that we need politics in Canada to put people first. As such, does she agree that it is totally unacceptable for the government to invest some $18 billion per year in the oil and gas sector and for us to own a $21-billion pipeline? Does she think that money could instead be used to feed the one in five people who skip meals? Does she think that money could be spent on providing heat for people who cannot afford it? We may well have resources, but we are not allocating them properly. That is what she should be thinking about.

214 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mrs. Rachael Thomas

Dec/5/22 5:12:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot there. Let us talk about the carbon tax. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Bad. Mrs. Rachael Thomas: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member across the way. He finally gave an honest answer and said it is bad. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

46 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mrs. Rachael Thomas

Dec/5/22 5:13:33 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Mr. Speaker, honestly, we have such an honest answer in the one the member across the way just gave, that the carbon tax is bad. I agree with him wholeheartedly: It is really bad. It is doing absolutely nothing to save the planet, but it is doing a whole lot to punish Canadians.

53 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Dec/5/22 5:56:18 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, I heard my colleague talk about removing the carbon tax. I am from British Columbia where the carbon tax was brought in by the B.C. Liberals, a right-leaning party, and was supported by all parties in British Columbia, just like the carbon tax here federally in the last election, which was supported by all parties represented here in the House. It is funny how the Conservatives changed their mind after an election. However, the Conservatives are calling for the removal of a carbon tax in jurisdictions such as where I live, where they do not actually have the authority to remove it. The carbon tax applies to liquids and gaseous fuels. It does not apply to electric heat. We put forward a proposal to remove the GST on home heating, which includes electricity, and the Conservatives voted against it. Will they stop misleading Canadians and start supporting proposals that can be implemented to help Canadians tackle the affordability crisis they are facing?

166 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Larry Maguire

Dec/5/22 5:57:16 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from the NDP for his support of the Liberals and keeping the carbon tax going in his area. We want to get rid of the carbon tax because it has proven not to reduce greenhouse gases, and it is costing people money out of their own pockets. What we are wanting to do, I think, is very responsible. We would like to leave that money in people's pockets to start with so they can make their decisions and then get our industries to use technology to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that are out there today, and they are doing it.

111 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Ted Falk

Dec/5/22 6:13:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, why would we not support GST on just home heating? That is a very narrow ask and it would not benefit everybody. What if we remove the carbon tax? The carbon tax affects absolutely everything in our economy. The carbon tax does not just drive up the cost of driving a vehicle from home to a place of work or to our kids' schools. It affects the cost of the farmers heating their grain and of the transport trucks delivering goods and services across the country, and it adds to the cost of groceries. The carbon tax is only a tax. It is not an environmental policy at all. It is just an additional tax grab. I think the Liberals are even starting to see the errors of their ways. The carbon tax should be reduced. It affects absolutely everything in our economy.

145 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Michael Barrett

Dec/5/22 6:26:16 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, I am so glad to talk about the effect of the carbon tax on Canadians' home heating. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. Michael Barrett: Madam Speaker, it seems some disorder has broken out on the other side, but I am laser focused with my Conservative colleagues on making life more affordable for Canadians. We need to scrap the carbon tax. That would allow Canadians to buy more of what they need, which is fuel to heat their homes. That is what we are focused on.

88 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Dec/5/22 6:28:34 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, it is absolute propaganda and misleading when the Conservatives rise in the House and start saying the federal government can remove the carbon tax in jurisdictions like mine in British Columbia. I have even seen Conservative MPs from B.C. suggest the same thing. We have had carbon pricing in British Columbia since 2009. It was brought in by the B.C. Liberals and supported by all parties in B.C. Just as I said earlier, even the Conservatives supported a price on carbon in the last election, but it is not convenient for them right now. We have been asking repeatedly whether the Conservatives will support removing the GST on home heating. It would also apply to electric heat, which millions of Canadians use. Will the Conservatives finally support the NDP's call to remove the GST on home heating?

143 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Michael Barrett

Dec/5/22 6:29:25 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, there is an NDP promise from B.C. that I agree with: “B.C. NDP promises to kill carbon tax”. That is from 2009, when it was introduced in that province. Maybe we will come full circle with my hon. colleague's party. I think the NDP of 2009 were bang on and now is the time to axe the carbon tax.

66 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 141 - Dec/5/22

Mr. Michael Barrett

Dec/5/22 6:38:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer said that households in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario will see a net loss with the federal carbon tax, including with any cheques that the government sends back to Canadians trying to fool them by taking money with the left hand and giving a little bit back with the right hand. This scheme is not going to do what this government claims it is going to do. It is not going to provide the environmental stewardship that it claims, nor is this government a model of that, as we have seen with the dumping of sewage in the St. Lawrence River, which runs through my community. What we are looking for is a plan from this government that makes life more affordable for Canadians. That means it is not going to introduce new spending unless it finds savings, and it means that it is going to need to axe its carbon tax.

158 words