44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 5, 2022 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, the member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry spent quite a bit of his speech speaking about a price on carbon, so I will spend some time on that.
What the member did not mention is that the economic cost of the wildfires in B.C. alone, let alone the deaths, is estimated between $10.6 billion to $17.1 billion. He is right to point out that emissions continue to go up, so obviously more needs to be done to address the climate crisis. Ending subsidies to fossil fuels should be part of that plan.
I would like to hear if the member is opposed to a carbon tax, which economists say is the most efficient way to address the climate crisis, one of many measures we need. We need to get more funds to those who are impacted the most by it. I would like to hear more from the member on what he would like to see done to have Canada step up and do its part to address the climate crisis.
178 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/22 3:00:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague has made a suggestion that we have not hit a target. The target that we have set is for 2030, so if she has a DeLorean and a flux capacitor, I invite her jump in and travel in time.
The reality is that we are on track to reduce our emissions because of the investments we are making. We are bringing pollution down, and we found a way to make it more affordable for families at the same time. Every step of the way, we will do what it takes to protect our environment for our kids and our grandkids and to advance measures that support affordability at the same time.
This is the path forward. If the Conservatives do not join us on it, they will enjoy sitting in opposition for a very long time.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/22 3:02:31 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I said before, emissions are going down. We are on track to make our targets, but the Conservative record is abysmal.
The first thing the Conservatives did when they came to power was to cancel the national child care program, but the second thing they did was blow up the Kyoto climate accord. Now they are blaming us for their lack of action. For their troubles, they won the Fossil of the Day award, the Fossil of the Year award and the Colossal Fossil award.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am happy that the member raised that as well because I am very concerned about it. Seven of my 14 years in the Manitoba legislature were spent as either the critic for the environment or conservation, and I have farmed all my life. Therefore, I am very concerned about it.
However, we have a situation here where the government is completely unaccountable for the situation it is faced with. It keeps taking money out of people's pockets, and it would be one thing if the greenhouse gases were going down, but they are not.
I think that the provinces that have made their own decisions on the greenhouse emissions and carbon tax are something that we are looking at. We will work with those provinces. The government continues to force the provinces to follow its rule in all of those particular areas, and with $54 billion of new spending, we need more accountability.
157 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/22 6:34:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to start by addressing the question of putting a price on pollution. This is something that the member opposite will certainly be familiar with, because he vigorously campaigned for it in the last election. This is also something that we are familiar with in British Columbia, where we have had a price on pollution since 2008. In the time since it has been implemented, not only have emissions per capita gone down, but we have actually led the country in economic growth. The clean-tech sector in British Columbia, for example, produces billions of dollars in revenue each and every single year and provides tens of thousands of good-paying, sustainable jobs.
In the last three years, the price on pollution in British Columbia has gone up by about two cents per litre despite gas prices going up by more than a dollar at times. This is a reflection of disruptions in the supply chain due to the pandemic and more recently due to the illegal war in Ukraine. While the Conservatives have tried to argue that the federal carbon price is driving inflation, they know that they are ignoring 98% of the real problem.
Further, taking aggressive action on climate change has become an economic necessity in itself. We have to act now to prevent further damages. Canada is confronted with more and more extreme climate events, such as floods, hurricanes and wildfires. The reality is that we can lead the fight against climate change, and we can do it in a way that creates good-paying jobs and new businesses for Canadians.
Our government also understands and appreciates the fact that a national price on pollution is the most effective and least costly way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is important to note that our plan is revenue-neutral and that, through the climate action incentive, life is actually made more affordable because of the carbon price for eight out of 10 Canadian families.
We do understand that Canadians are having issues making ends meet. We are worried as our country's economy faces a period of slower economic growth due to the global challenges of high inflation and higher interest rates. We understand these concerns and we are all experiencing these challenges alongside our constituents. We feel the pain of inflation when we go to the grocery store, fill up our tanks and, of course, when we pay our rent.
With regard to grocery store prices in particular, we have specific concerns, which is why earlier this year the Minister of Innovation wrote to the Competition Bureau to make sure it was using all of its tools to detect and deter any unlawful behaviours that might be leading to higher prices or profiteering in the food sector.
In addition, we have provided targeted supports to Canadians through the fall economic statement and the budget to ensure that we give the help that Canadians need, in particular, to those Canadians who need it the most. A good example of this is the doubling of the GST credit. This is a significant investment of $2.5 billion in support that will help 11 million households and more than 50% of our seniors. I actually want to thank the member opposite for supporting this important measure.
We know that there is no country better placed than Canada to weather the coming global economic slowdown and then thrive in the years ahead. This is because our unemployment rate continues to be near its record low, and our country has an AAA credit rating. We also have the strongest economic growth in the G7 so far this year, and the lowest deficit and net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. In fact, those advantages increased over the course of the pandemic, thanks to our strong fiscal leadership. As well, our health outcomes and job recovery rates are significantly better than those in the United States, and that is going to put us in an even better position going forward.
674 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/22 6:54:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to start by thanking my friend opposite for raising these questions. I used to represent the people of her riding as a municipal city councillor some 23 years ago in Nanaimo. In fact, I sat on the advisory committee to the environment there.
The member and I have had some good discussions around various environmental issues, including climate change. I am glad we have a further opportunity to share some time in the chamber today.
The federal government has committed to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies. At the same time, we are increasing investments in clean technology and clean energy production. I cannot cover the entirety of our plan to fight climate change and grow the economy in four minutes, but I would encourage anyone who is interested to read my reports on climate change and the environment and growing the economy, both of which are available at terrybeechmp.ca.
It is also important to note that we are not just committed to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, but we have actually accelerated our previous timeline for doing so from 2025 to 2023, which is a matter of weeks away. In fact, we have already taken action to phase out nine tax measures supporting the fossil fuel sector to date.
In budget 2022, as another example, the government committed to eliminating the flow-through share regime for fossil fuel activities. This means tax benefits available to companies and their investors will no longer be available after March 31, 2023, which is less than four months from now.
At COP27 last month in Egypt, Canadian representatives also fought to prevent other countries from backing down on phasing out subsidies for fossil fuels and coal, which are still the single largest contributor to CO2 emissions globally. We are also on track to eliminate coal-fired energy in Canada within the next seven years.
The reality is that our government has taken concrete action to fight pollution and to produce cleaner air for everyone. This is also why we introduced a price on carbon pollution across Canada in 2019. My friend opposite would be familiar with this approach, as B.C. has had a price on pollution since 2008. In fact, the carbon price has not only helped lower emissions per capita, but B.C. has enjoyed one of the fastest-growing economies in the country since it was implemented.
An important part of this economic growth story is that a majority of Canada's clean-tech sector is actually located in British Columbia and accounts for billions of dollars in revenue each and every single year and tens of thousands of good, sustainable, high-paying jobs. It is a good analogy for how successful Canada can be as more of the world demands clean and sustainable sources of energy and solutions for fighting climate change.
There really is no doubt that our approach is working. Industries are already being encouraged to become more emissions-efficient and to use cleaner technologies. This in turn encourages the development of new and innovative approaches to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and using energy more efficiently. This in turn creates new business development opportunities.
The fact is that we cannot have a credible plan to grow our economy without also having a credible plan to protect the environment and to fight climate change. That said, we also know that we need to work with industry to find economically viable solutions and technologies.
Carbon capture, utilization and storage, CCUS for short, is an important tool for reducing emissions in high-emitting sectors, especially if other pathways to reducing emissions are limited or unavailable. I would note that many respected global organizations support CCUS development, including the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Paris-based International Energy Agency. It will help not just the oil and gas sector to reduce emissions, but emission-intensive sectors like steel production, cement and other emission-intensive industries as well.
665 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
