44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 10, 2023 02:00PM
- May/10/23 2:29:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Montrealers, like Canadians all across the country, care deeply about protecting the environment and also know that the only way to create good jobs, strong communities and a better future is to fight climate change while we build a stronger economy. That is exactly what we have a plan to do. That is why we put a price on pollution and are sending the climate action incentive back to Canadians, where it applies, so that eight out of 10 Canadians are doing better with that.
We are fighting climate change and building a stronger economy, two things that the Conservatives apparently know nothing about.
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/23 3:08:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, years ago we decided that here in Canada it is no longer free to pollute. We made sure there was a price on pollution across the country.
In doing so, we also put more money in the pockets of average families in the country to ensure that while we fight climate change we continue to invest in the cost of living for families.
This is working, not just in terms of lowering our emissions, which is happening, but also for creating economic opportunities, economic growth and good jobs for the middle class.
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/23 3:42:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of the staff and students of Notre Dame Secondary School, a Catholic school in my riding of Brampton North.
Although the oil and gas sector is only 5% of the economy, it is responsible for 26% of Canada's emissions. The petitioners call for a hard cap on emissions from the oil and gas sector to address the climate crisis.
They give a five-point plan on how to do so, by restricting pollution, reducing emissions, addressing extraction methods and the burning of fossil fuels, and phasing out fossil fuel subsidies. They lay out a groundwork for a just transition to a net-zero economy by 2050.
117 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/23 6:11:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I found it interesting that the member, my friend, started the discussion this evening by talking about the carbon tax, or a price on pollution, whatever one wants to call it. He started off by saying we were misleading Canadians.
On that particular point, I have to make mention of the fact that there were 338 Conservative candidates in the last federal election who knocked on doors with an election platform. That election platform, under the stewardship of Erin O'Toole, who was the leader of the Conservative Party at the time—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/23 6:15:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my apologies. I withdraw the name.
The former leader of the Conservative Party campaigned on the policy that a price on pollution, or a carbon tax, is a good thing. The member stands up and says we are misleading Canadians, yet he campaigned on a platform that made it very clear to Canadians that, if the Conservatives were elected into government, they would put a price on pollution. I think the member needs to reflect on the issue of misleading Canadians, because there is no doubt about that. We could show him the platform position of the Conservative Party, the platform that he himself has raised.
The member also made reference to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. He said the Parliamentary Budget Officer said there was a net loss. However, the Parliamentary Budget Officer also indicated that when we factor in the rebate portion, 80% of the population will receive more money than they are paying in the tax. One might argue we should factor in this and that, but I would suggest that if we factor in this and that, like floods, forest fires and all the other factors, they would also have to be calculated in. The bottom line is that the same Parliamentary Budget Officer has made it very clear that, dollar for dollar, there is a net gain for 80% of the population.
When we talk about other jurisdictions, we now have Atlantic Canadians seeing the benefits of having the rebate structure we have in place. Those provinces are now moving to the federal program, which is something they opted to do.
I would suggest that one of the best ways of dealing with emissions and being sensitive to our environment is to recognize what many governments around the world have done, including this government, which is to assign a price on pollution. Interestingly enough, members might be surprised to know that the first legislative government to ever do something of this nature was the Alberta Conservative Party many years ago.
336 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/23 6:16:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Conservatives will have to justify to Canadians sometime in 2025, I suspect, when we will be going back to the polls, although we never know in a minority situation, why they misled Canadians in the last federal election and are now saying they will get rid of the price on pollution. A part of that explanation should also incorporate that they will be getting rid of the rebate. The benefit of the rebate is that 80% of people are receiving a larger rebate than they are paying into the program. In essence, they would be taking more money out of the pockets of 80% of Canadians.
In terms of hospitals and universities, this government has made significant investments, both capital and otherwise, in our health care and post-secondary facilities, and the numbers will—
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
