SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 172

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 23, 2023 10:00AM
  • Mar/23/23 11:06:27 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, there has been a lot of commentary particularly, from both sides of the House, on Canada's climate record. As a Green, I can also say in a non-partisan way that no government in this country has ever met a single climate target to which we have signed on in legally binding agreements. Neither Stephen Harper nor any Liberal prime minister has done so. Not only have we never hit a target, but we have also never gotten the direction right. Our emissions go up instead of going down. As we look at the budget next week, does my hon. colleague and friend not think it would be good to stop putting billions of dollars into promoting fossil fuel use, cut them altogether and cancel the Trans Mountain pipeline?
132 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/23/23 1:10:49 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is a huge honour to table a petition today that has been gathered by youth in my riding in the town of Qualicum Beach, climate activists who cite that children born in 2020 will face on average two to seven times more extreme weather events than their grandparents. In a 2021 report in the Lancet, 83% of children worldwide reported that they thought people had failed to take care of the planet. They note that those most affected by climate change are the youngest generation as they will live to see the worst effects of this crisis; that youth discussion has proven critical to successful climate action and policy creation, however, dozens of climate-related decisions are made without input from youth. The petitioners call on the Government of Canada to require all members of Parliament, regardless of party lines, to consult with a secondary or elementary school leadership, student council or environmental youth group of their riding, such as under-18 youth representatives, before Parliament holds second reading of any bill that directly affects Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions; and that the purpose of the consultation will be to listen to the viewpoints of those directly affected by the specified bill, but who do not already have representation in Parliament. I thank those youth for this very important petition.
224 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/23/23 2:13:21 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, they say this Prime Minister has never met a tax he did not like. He said no to relief from GST on home heating and fuels, he said no to freezing the rising escalator tax on beer, wine and spirits, and instead of providing relief to Canadians, the Liberals are increasing the carbon tax by 25% on April 1. This Prime Minister does not understand science any better than he does the struggles of ordinary Canadians. For instance, in my riding, we have the largest concentration of greenhouses in North America. They are essential to our food security. Up to 75% of the carbon dioxide emissions can be recirculated back for essential plant growth, yet they are taxed. As most farm operations are now over 15 acres in size, by 2030, these operators will have paid another $1.3 million in carbon tax. When will this Prime Minister get the facts and stop the tax?
157 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/23/23 7:14:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are at a critical moment. This week, the IPCC issued a final report, a final warning. It says, in no uncertain terms, that we must act now or it will be too late. One of the report's authors noted, “The message in terms of urgency...is stop burning fossil fuels as fast as humanly possible.” They explain that we are at a crisis point, not because we are lacking some important technology or some important information but because “the sense of urgency has been lacking in the places where the important decisions are made”. In Canada, that place where important decisions are made is here, in the House of Commons. The government lacks the urgency. It lacks the commitment and it lacks the courage to take the action we need. The Liberals say they are committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, yet they continue to subsidize the fossil fuel industry. They are handing over billions of dollars to rich oil and gas executives. I continue to call on the government to end subsidies to oil and gas, and instead invest those billions into clean energy, into climate solutions. In the United States, the Biden administration has committed to spending $60 billion on clean energy manufacturing. This goes directly into building solar panels, wind turbines and batteries. These are proven solutions. Climate scientists agree that renewable energies are the best tools we have for reducing our emissions, yet the Liberals are instead giving massive tax breaks to oil and gas companies for unproven technologies that keep the fantasy of increasing oil and gas production alive. The reality is that the current carbon capture projects in Canada capture only less than 1% of our emissions. The Liberals say that carbon capture technology is one of the many solutions they will use when it comes to fighting the climate crisis, but it happens to be the oil and gas industry's favourite solution. The Liberals' friends at McKinsey have published multiple articles touting CCS as a low-risk piece of the decarbonization puzzle, but according to the IPCC, carbon capture is one of the most expensive and least effective tools. In fact, the report names wind and solar energy as the most effective solutions for reducing our emissions. If we want to meet our 2030 targets, there is a logical way forward: invest our tax dollars in renewable energy and make the oil and gas industry pay for its own carbon capture and storage. Experts are already warning that the Liberals' tax credit on carbon capture and storage will be a fossil fuel subsidy, more handouts to an industry making record-breaking profits. In a report on fossil fuel subsidies, Canada and Saudi Arabia were named the worst performers, handing out the most money to these companies as they make more profit than they have ever made before. We have now learned that Saudi Arabia lobbied to elevate the role of carbon removal in the latest UN climate science summary report. We also know that Canada lobbied to emphasize the importance of carbon capture in the last IPCC summary report, which begs the question, why is the Liberal government acting like a petrostate when Canada has a diversified economy? Why are the Liberals doing the oil and gas lobby's dirty work? Why are they making Canadians pay billions to clean up the oil and gas industry's emissions?
574 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/23/23 7:17:57 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member should know the countless number of initiatives the government has taken with respect to climate change and reducing our carbon footprint. The member should also know that the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change talked about a portion of that being specifically about carbon capture. I will read to her the exact quote. It says, “A net-zero energy system...can only be achieved with a broad suite of technologies. Carbon capture, utilisation and storage...is only a group of technologies that contributes to both reducing emissions in key sectors directly and removing CO2 to balance emissions that are challenging to avoid—a critical part of 'net' zero goals.” That is from the report, specifically. The member should also know, and it is interesting because this did come up in the debate earlier today, that the finance committee did make a recommendation to the government to do exactly what she was saying, which is to reduce the fossil fuel subsidies and to put that money into renewable transition, specifically as it relates to a cleaner environment and a cleaner energy supply. When it comes to reducing the fossil fuel subsidies specifically, it might not be as quickly as we would like to see it. In my personal opinion, I might agree with the member more than she thinks, but the reality is that the government has been reducing the amount of fossil fuel subsidies over the year. The problem is that when the NDP members talk about this, they specifically include, in that calculation, money that is being used for abandoned or orphaned wells. The reality of the situation is that, although I would have loved to see the companies that abandoned those wells deal with them, they have not. A lot of them have left, so it becomes society's responsibility to deal with those wells, despite the fact that we let those companies get away with it in years and decades gone by. When we talk about fossil fuel subsidies, I think it is disingenuous to do what the NDP does and include the money that is being used to deal with orphaned wells in that as a subsidy. If we exclude that, it clearly shows that the subsidies have been declining year after year and are on target to meet what the minister and the department have been proposing for the last number of years.
407 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border