44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 8, 2023 02:00PM
- Nov/8/23 2:29:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the only division in this country as to whether we should be doing everything we can to fight climate change is within the Conservative Party. Canadians are unequivocal that we need to fight climate change, and we need to support Canadians through that. That is why our price on pollution returns hundreds of dollars every three months to the average family of four while fighting climate change and watching our curve bend faster over the past two years than the curves of the other G7 countries. We will continue to hold Canadians together as we fight climate change, while Conservatives continue to bring us backward.
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 2:37:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it was with confusion and consternation that I noted the way the NDP voted with the Conservatives against one of the most successful measures Canada has ever seen in the fight against climate change.
Putting a price on pollution is exactly how we have managed to bend the curve on our emissions faster than other G7 countries over the past two years and how we are moving forward with global leadership on the fight against climate change. Seeing the NDP vote with the Conservatives against a price on pollution is something that has disappointed millions of progressives across this country.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 2:39:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know that progressives across the country were deeply disappointed to see the NDP vote with the Conservatives against the most successful measure to fight climate change that Canada has taken. Putting a price on pollution across the country has allowed us to fight climate change, invest in renewable energy and put more money in the pockets of eight out of 10 families where the federal price on pollution applies.
We will continue to fight climate change. We hope that the NDP will rejoin the battle.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 2:41:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we know that farmers are always focused on being good stewards of the land, and we are working with them in investing and in supporting them in many different ways to ensure that we can continue to put good-quality affordable food on people's tables right across the country. That is what we are going to continue to do.
Farmers, and indeed Canadians from coast to coast to coast, know that, as we fight climate change and as we put more money in people's pockets every three months, hundreds of dollars, with the pollution price return, we are going to continue to step up in building a strong economy for tomorrow, something the Conservatives simply do not understand.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 5:25:51 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I, for one, always believe that there is room for improvement; there is no doubt about that. However, as I said, I have every confidence in the Minister of Environment and his leadership on the file, and we are moving in the right direction.
I believe that net zero is in fact achievable. I look forward to continuing to bring in and see policies through the government that will actually help lead us in that direction, whether through the Canada Infrastructure Bank and the investments it is making in co-operation with other stakeholders to direct government involvement or with things such as heat pumps.
I do recognize that the Green Party actually voted with the Liberals the other day in relation to the heat pumps and the incentives in supporting the price on pollution. I do appreciate that.
141 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 5:53:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her very clear and enlightening speech on the repercussions of climate change and the social cost of not taking care of the environment. Our Conservative friends could not care less about that, but there is a social cost. My colleague talked about what that costs a society. This social cost has even been highlighted by the International Monetary Fund, or IMF. The IMF—which is not Équiterre, Greenpeace or some far-left environmental organization—published an analysis that Le Devoir reported on under the headline, “Canada's fossil fuel subsidies reached $38 billion U.S. last year [in 2022]”. The article states the following:
The vast majority of the subsidies cited by IMF researchers, or $36 billion U.S., comes primarily from public funds linked to our dependence on fossil fuels. These include the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions and the associated climate crisis, the consequences of air pollution (including premature deaths), and the costs of traffic congestion and road accidents.
We are talking about $50 billion in 2022 handed over to an industry that made $200 billion in profits that same year. The math is simply unbelievable. That amounts to $50 billion in repercussions for Canada. I think my colleague gave a really brilliant outline of the $50 billion. I thank her very much.
231 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 7:12:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the climate crisis is here. Thousands of Canadians were evacuated from their homes in the worst wildfire season on record. Hundreds died in heat domes. Extreme weather is only getting more frequent and more severe.
If we want to have any hope of meeting our climate targets, we must implement a strong emissions cap on the oil and gas industry. In Canada, despite accounting for just 5% of Canada's economy, oil and gas is responsible for over a quarter of Canada's emissions, more than any other sector.
Despite the greenwashing that we hear from industry lobbyists, from their friends in the Liberal Party and from corporate-controlled Conservatives, oil and gas emissions are increasing year after year. The oil and gas sector's expansion has gone unchecked in Canada, and there have been no limits on how much pollution they are allowed to create.
A strong cap on emissions would be that limit. The Liberals promised to deliver a cap on emissions but, instead, they continue to delay and disappoint. It is time to hold the oil and gas sector accountable for the fact that they are fuelling the climate crisis. It is not like they cannot afford it. Oil executives are raking in record profits, while everyday Canadians are struggling to make ends meet.
If the Liberals wanted to stop pretending to be a climate leader and instead take real climate action, they would stop listening to oil and gas CEOs and implement a hard cap on emissions, one without the loopholes and delays that the oil and gas lobbyists are pushing for.
A hard cap would be aligned with the Paris Agreement of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius. It needs to be enforceable, and a hard cap on absolute levels of emissions; no loopholes and relief valves that let companies off the hook. This means emissions reductions would need to happen within the sector, not through purchasing offsets for reductions elsewhere. Companies should only receive credit for proven reductions, not hypothetical reductions based on speculative technologies.
A strong emissions cap needs to include strong enforcement measures. Penalties and fines have to be significant enough that they actually deter or change behaviour rather than simply allowing companies to internalize small fines as the cost of doing business and continuing with business as usual.
We need to look at compliance mechanisms that are not financial, things like mandated production cuts or the use of the criminal powers under CEPA. It also must uphold indigenous rights. We need to ensure that the rights affirmed in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples continue to be upheld within the emissions cap, including securing indigenous peoples' free, prior and informed consent for energy development in their territory.
The Liberal government needs to get serious about prioritizing our health and our future over the profits of rich CEOs. We cannot afford a weak emissions cap that does not hold the oil and gas industry accountable.
My question to the member is this. When will the government stop delaying and start keeping some of its climate promises? When will we see a cap on emissions?
530 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 7:16:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when it comes to the environment, we have a government that has clearly demonstrated, since coming to office in 2015, a genuine and sincere commitment to Canada's environment. In fact, the total greenhouse emissions that have been taken away are somewhere in the neighbourhood of 53 million tonnes since 2015. That is the equivalent of 11 million gas vehicles. Looking at it from a world perspective, of all the G20 countries, Canada is the only one that has actually eliminated fossil fuel subsidies. We even did that in advance of the dates by which we said we would do it. We have a government that has made the commitment to put a cap on emissions from the oil and gas sector.
If we contrast the messaging that I hear tonight from the member across the aisle to the way in which she actually voted the other day on the Conservative opposition motion, there are a number of progressive people who are who are looking at the NDP and are getting a confused message. Part of what we talk about is how people can actually convert from oil heating to heat pumps, and I think the NDP might have been manipulated into supporting the Conservative motion in regard to the policy that the government put into place. That policy is to get people throughout Canada to take advantage of conversion from oil heating to heat pumps, which are much better for the environment and more affordable for Canadians.
Games were played. In the House, the majority of the political entities, including the Greens, the Bloc members and obviously the Liberals, saw what the Conservatives were doing. The NDP, on the other hand, voted with the Conservatives. It sends a very mixed message when the member stands up and talks about emissions and then votes for a motion that goes against a price on pollution, remembering that with the price on pollution there are also the rebates that complement it. It also goes against the idea of sound policy that would ensure that more people convert to heat pumps from oil heating.
I would suggest that is a good thing, and the government has a good track record already on that. The greener homes program, again, is about tens of thousands of homes, in all regions of the country combined, that have actually made a conversion and are now using heat pumps, recognizing that heat pumps are far better for our environment. This is a program, as an example, which the government has brought forward.
Whether it is budgetary measures or legislative measures, we have been found to be a very progressive government in dealing with the environment and emissions.
451 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/8/23 7:21:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member makes reference to a vote that took place today on, again, a bad NDP policy. Let us think about it. What the New Democrats want to do is to completely get rid of the GST on fossil fuels, whether that is natural gas or oil. The GST provides a very significant rebate. That is what makes it progressive.
The people who would benefit the most by the policy that the NDP was advocating are Canada's 1% wealthiest people. Those are the ones who actually would benefit the most because there is a rebate section to the GST. That is not to mention the many other inequities in that particular policy. That is why I suggest that the New Democrats need to think through their policies in regard to what is coming to the floor related to the price on pollution or to the GST, because the New Democrats' actions do not support a healthier environment.
160 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
