44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 1, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/1/23 3:08:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, now that Roxham Road is closed, the hotels booked and paid for by the government are empty. Even though the Prime Minister spent six years telling us that it was impossible to solve the Roxham Road problem, we now see that it was feasible. Now, we have learned that the government wants to renew the hotel contracts for $14 million, adding to a total contract of $60 million so far.
Why book hotels that will be empty now that the Roxham Road problem is solved?
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:09:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate my colleague's question, because it allows me to further reinforce the idea that, on that side of the House, what they were trying to do was virtually nothing.
We worked very hard to renegotiate the agreement between the United States and Canada. We have always been there for people who ask for help. We are already seeing concrete results regarding asylum seekers. We will always be there for the well-being of all the people who ask for Canada's help.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:09:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, water is our most precious natural resource. It is crucial to our well-being and our economy. Canada has 20% of the world's fresh water. It is both an asset and a huge responsibility.
Last week, the Prime Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change were in Winnipeg to announce the creation of the new Canada water agency.
Can the Minister of Environment and Climate Change tell us more about this important step toward protecting 30% of Canada's water by 2030?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:10:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for all his work on the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.
In the latest budget, we invested $750 million to protect fresh water across the country. We have delivered on our promise to create an independent water agency, which will be located in Winnipeg. By protecting water, we are protecting the health of Canadians, our economy and our country's future.
There is more to do, but we have already done a lot.
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:10:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am disgusted. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador are disgusted. After four years of Liberal delays, the Bay du Nord project was approved with 137 onerous conditions attached.
Because of these Liberal shenanigans, we now have the Bay du Nord project put on the shelf for three years. It is costing the Newfoundland and Labrador economy $3 billion in royalties and revenues.
My question to the minister is this: Will he revisit the 137 onerous conditions or will he let this project die and let the province of Newfoundland and Labrador—
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:11:33 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. parliamentary secretary.
4 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:11:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, again, I want to reiterate that this was an independent business decision that was based largely on market forces.
Let us talk about the fact that Newfoundland and Labrador's opportunities go well beyond one project and that is where we are with them, to support them. In fact, we have, just this past week, tabled a bill with the accord acts, to make sure they are able to take advantage of offshore opportunities, including with wind and hydrogen.
In fact, the member opposite would know that when the German chancellor came to Newfoundland and Labrador, what he asked for was hydrogen and we signed an accord for that.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:12:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals label the carbon tax a “market mechanism” or a “standard”, when in reality it is a fancy way of saying that the centrepiece of their environmental policy is based on forcing Canadians to pay more.
Albertans are going to pay nearly $4,000 more per year when both carbon tax 1 and 2 are imposed. Farmers would pay more than $150,000 on average to fund this failed leftist ideological experiment.
Canadians need a break. Farmers need a break. When will the Prime Minister finally listen to Canadians and axe the tax?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:12:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would remind my hon. colleague that he campaigned during the last election on putting carbon pricing in place.
He is saying no to billions of dollars of investment already happening in Canada, in Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan, Quebec, Alberta and southern Ontario, in the new economy. That is what Conservatives are saying no to.
We are saying yes to fighting climate change. We are saying yes to having a strong economy.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
It being 3:13 p.m., pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading of Bill C-42.
Call in the members.
42 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology.
18 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:26:13 p.m.
- Watch
I wish to inform the House that, because of the deferred recorded division, Government Orders will be extended by 12 minutes.
21 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:26:40 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I can understand—
6 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:26:44 p.m.
- Watch
I am asking everyone to keep quiet for a little while, or at least not to talk as loudly. The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:26:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I can understand that, in the excitement of question period, the Speaker may find it difficult to recognize me when I rise. However, for the Thursday question, I think it is very important.
In fact, all my colleagues in the House of Commons cannot wait for this very important moment when they will finally hear the government's proposed agenda for tomorrow and next week, especially given the heat we experienced today. I am talking about the weather.
Given that we will likely have some very long days next week, I would like the government House leader to inform us of the temperature of the House for next week.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:27:33 p.m.
- Watch
4 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:27:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is the first time that I have had the honour to share with our very dear colleagues in the House the message concerning the Thursday question. I am very pleased to answer my colleague.
As members know, Bill C-47, the budget implementation act, was reported from committee yesterday, so we will call it for the final stages of debate starting tomorrow and then continue early next week on Monday and Tuesday.
We will also give priority to Bill C-40, the miscarriage of justice review commission act, also known as David and Joyce Milgaard's law; Bill C-48, bail reform; and Bill C-41, humanitarian assistance.
Finally, I would like to inform the House that next Thursday will be an opposition day.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:28:47 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to continue my speech, which I started before question period. I highlighted some very obvious hypocrisies and these are hypocrisies that we have seen from the Conservative Party of Canada.
I outlined for everybody what many of us have been talking about in the House. The Liberals, the NDP and even the Bloc at times have asked the Conservatives why they ran in an election in 2021 on pricing pollution, only to come to the House immediately after that election and move virtually the exact same opposition motion about carbon pricing that they are moving today, for the 10th time since that last election, when they ran on it.
What I found to be even more staggeringly offensive, or perhaps a better expression would be concerning, is that there are a number of Conservative MPs, and I believe the number, if I have it right, is 19 members of the Conservative Party, current members of the House, who not only ran in 2021 on pricing pollution, but also ran in 2008 on Stephen Harper's promise to bring in cap and trade, which is another form of pricing pollution. It is a form that, I would add, the province of Quebec continues to this day. As a result, Quebec does not have the federal pricing mechanism that many of the other provinces, such as the one I am from, Ontario, are subject to.
Members can think of how far to the right this particular brand of the Conservative Party has come. This is not from Brian Mulroney, because we know it is light years away from Brian Mulroney. Brian Mulroney and Flora MacDonald, from my riding, were Progressive Conservatives who cared about the environment. They were Progressive Conservatives who fought for things such as saving the ozone layer, and who worked with Americans to do that. Those were Progressive Conservatives, the Progressive Conservatives of Brian Mulroney.
Brian Mulroney brought 42 countries from around the world to Montreal to talk about how to deal with acid rain. That was a progressive Conservative party, but this party, in its current form, is even further to the right than Stephen Harper. I do not know if members are aware of this, and I just became aware of it this morning, but there were ads run by the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association at one time thanking Stephen Harper for the work he was doing when it came to renewable fuels as a form of energy.
Here we are in 2023, with a political party, the Conservative Party of Canada, that does not even believe in climate change. I would argue that this is really just the Reform Party using the Conservative name and the shade of blue. That might be offensive to some members sitting in the House right now, but as I read out earlier, we heard a statement from the member for Red Deer—Mountain View just two days ago, in which he basically said that this is all cyclical, happens every 10,000 years and there is nothing to see here. This is the Conservative Party of Canada we are dealing with now.
We are in a world where it is so glaringly obvious that humans have contributed to climate change, and where it is so obvious that we need to actually do something about it. Rather than try to bring forward policy, create ideas and bring forward suggestions to work on protecting our environment, the Conservative Party of Canada has brought forward 10 motions in the last 18 months trying to eliminate the price on pollution, despite the fact it has already lost two elections since it was introduced.
618 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:33:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member made reference to Conservatives losing an election. What I think is important, for anyone who is following the debate today, and we have heard it in questions and comments, and during question period, is the fact that 338 candidates in the last federal election, who were all Conservative candidates, had a platform, a platform that my friend and colleague tried to table earlier today, which made it very clear that they were campaigning in favour of a price on pollution. I am wondering if he could just discuss that a little more, the details and his perception of that particular promise.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 3:34:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is true. They might disagree with it now, and to the defence of one member of the Conservative Party, she, of the numerous times I have asked that question, was the one member who stood up and said she disagreed with the policy they ran on in 2021. I will hand it to that one member. I will not call her out by name right now because I do not want her to receive any emails to her office to that effect, but every other Conservative we asked the question of just completely skated around it. At least they could stand up to say they ran on it in 2021, it was part of their platform and it was a price on pollution, but now they have changed their mind.
That would be so much more honourable than just trying to avoid answering the question every time. I did try to table that platform, as the parliamentary secretary said. I tried to table the 2021 and 2008 platforms, in which they talk about pricing pollution, in the House before question period. Do members know who yelled out no to that, not letting me table them? It was Conservatives. They would not let me table their own platforms.
210 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
