SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 204

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 1, 2023 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 204 - Jun/1/23
Mr. Mario Simard
  • Jun/1/23 11:27:43 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not sure I entirely follow where my colleague is going with this. I have never heard of a tax that would apply to the forestry sector because a tree sequesters carbon. He asked me to provide a definition of populism. To me, it is quite clear. It refers to politicians who try to oversimplify certain issues, sow division and create antagonism without listening to reason, to common sense, to science. The science shows that climate change is going to cost us a fortune. If we listen to the science, then we should try to prepare for this looming threat and put in place measures such as carbon pricing. It is as simple as that.
118 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 204 - Jun/1/23
Mr. Patrick Weiler (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, Lib.)
  • Jun/1/23 12:11:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with just about everything my hon. colleague mentioned. While it is frustrating that we keep having this debate, it does give us an opportunity to talk about climate policy. We know that our province has many successful climate policies, but we know the climate crisis and the biodiversity crises are intertwined. One area where I have been very frustrated to see a lack of change in policy in our province is the continued logging of old-growth trees. I put forward a motion that would ban old-growth logging on federal lands and the export of old-growth logs and their products, while we work with the province to move toward more sustainable forms of forestry, including supporting conservation. I was wondering what my colleague thinks of this motion, and if he would be willing to support it—
143 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 204 - Jun/1/23
Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)
  • Jun/1/23 12:13:14 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. Earlier we heard the Conservatives touting carbon capture technologies, and we often see the Liberals doing the same. However, just about every scientist in the world criticizes those technologies. The Conservatives praise this technology a lot, saying that it is a cure-all, a miracle, and that, in the end, it will mean oil sands development is not so bad for the environment. This morning, I heard a Conservative MP push the envelope even further, incredibly enough. He talked about the forestry industry. We know that trees capture carbon. This MP asked whether we should also tax the forestry industry because trees capture carbon. When misinformation like that is sent out to the public, does it not make things even more confusing for citizens? Does it not make the job even harder for those who want to provide correct information?
151 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border