44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 7, 2023 10:00AM
- Dec/7/23 10:42:37 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the things the Conservatives are is very consistent, in the sense that they neither understand nor appreciate the policy issues related to our environment. They are, indeed, climate deniers. Today, we are going to be debating the Conservatives' agenda to get rid of the price on pollution. There would be a substantial cost to that.
The member, in his election platform, indicated to his voters that he supported a price on pollution. How does he justify the 180° flip-flop on that issue?
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 10:46:16 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, through you, I would like to point out to my colleague that Quebec's agriculture sector is not regulated by federal carbon pricing or the Quebec carbon market.
If the Conservatives are so concerned about farmers, what is their game plan for fighting climate change, which is having a major impact on our agriculture industry?
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 11:12:25 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, here is what the Liberal government is actually doing. This morning, after a two-year wait, it finally unveiled its plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector, the emissions cap it has been touting. However, it is worse than anything we could have imagined.
Two years ago, the government said that Canadian society as a whole would have to cut its GHG emissions by 40% to 45%, but that the oil and gas sector would only have to cut its emissions by 31%. Today, we learn that that figure is no longer 31% but 16% to 20%, that the industry has no obligations to meet until 2030, and that it is free to increase oil and gas production in this country.
How does my colleague explain this climate crisis betrayal?
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 12:03:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Victoria for her very interesting speech. I also thank her for all her hard work and her passion for the environmental and climate emergency files, as well as for housing and first nations issues, both in British Columbia and across the country.
The Conservatives are still pathologically obsessed with the carbon tax, which is really a price on pollution. When we talk about a price on pollution, we are clearly talking about the environment, climate emergencies and the climate crisis. Speaking of the environment, I cannot help but mention the Liberal government's announcement this morning about a cap on greenhouse gas emissions in the oil and gas sector.
Two years ago, at COP26 in Glasgow, the Prime Minister said we had to implement a cap on greenhouse gas emissions in the oil and gas sector. We waited two years. What we are seeing today is worse than anything we feared, worse than anything we imagined. I am sure my colleagues will believe me when I say that we have quite a rich imagination.
It is appalling to ask society as a whole to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40% to 45%. In fact we could have a discussion about the proportionality and burden of responsibility of every Canadian and the Canadian economy with respect to the targets we need to reach to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees or 2 degrees. We are heading more for 2 degrees. We should be prepared to reduce our emissions by 50% to 60%, because, per capita, Quebeckers and Canadians create a lot of pollution and produce huge amounts of greenhouse gases.
Let us consider a 45% decrease. Two years ago, we were told that the oil and gas sector would probably have to reduce its emissions by 31%. That means 10% to 15% are now gone; that is a gift from the government, thank you very much. This morning we learned that the oil and gas sector no longer has to reduce its emissions by 31%, but that the Liberals would be happy with a 16% to 20% decrease. That is ridiculous. It is irresponsible for our children and for future generations. Given the climate emergency, that is a joke. Why is it a joke? Because this government listens only to lobbyists from big oil.
We said it yesterday, and again today: In the past two years, there have been 2,000 meetings with lobbyists and representatives from oil and gas companies. Considering there are 365 days in a year, that amounts to more than three meetings a day between oil lobbyists and the ministerial offices of a government that calls itself pro-environment. That includes Saturdays, Sundays, Christmas Day, Easter, Hanukkah and more. Then we wonder who the Liberals are listening to. There were three times more meetings between oil company representatives and the Prime Minister’s Office, the Privy Council, Treasury Board and Finance than there were meetings with environmental groups.
That is the root cause of what we are seeing this morning. This joke they call a “cap” is nothing but rubbish. There is nothing in it except a blank cheque to the oil companies so they can continue to do business as usual. Not only has the reduction dropped to 16% to 20%, but these corporations have no obligations until 2030. They have carte blanche for the next seven years and after that a bit of flexibility. That means they will be allowed to continue increasing production. I do not know how they are going to achieve a 16% to 20% reduction while continuing to increase production. There is so much flexibility in the document presented by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change that it reminds me of a yoga class with people able to perform the most absolutely incredible contortions.
This is totally irresponsible on the part of a government that claims to care about the climate and the environment, but then puts this kind of nonsense forward this morning, even though oil and gas is the economic sector that emits the most greenhouse gases. I believe it is responsible for 24% of total emissions. That is huge, even more than transportation.
The increase in Canada's greenhouse gas emissions since 1990 is mainly due to an 88% increase in emissions from the oil and gas sector. It emitted 100 million tonnes in 1990, 168 million tonnes in 2005, and 189 million tonnes in 2021. Now the government is telling the oil and gas sector that it will not have to worry for the next seven years. The government is giving it carte blanche, or should I say “carte noire”. The oil and gas sector can carry on polluting as much as it wants. There might be a target sometime around 2050, maybe. We will see. Sadly, this is consistent with the Liberals' vision and proposals since 2015.
We learned just this week that the government plans to subsidize oil companies to the tune of $12.5 billion for carbon capture technology. That is a page out of the Conservatives' playbook. The Minister of Environment, once an environmental activist, basically copied and pasted the Conservative Party leader's plan, a far-fetched fantasy in which a magic technological wand solves all our problems. This is public money paying for this, even though we know that carbon capture technology is not proven, has not been properly tested and is not producing the promised results.
We need to shift toward the centre and have a strong energy sector that focuses on renewable energy. That is what the science has been telling us for years, but the Conservatives and the Liberals are going in the completely opposite direction. That is not surprising from a government that bought the Trans Mountain pipeline, which has so little future that no private sector player wanted to buy it. It was also the Liberals who saw to it that everyone here, along with the people we represent in our ridings, is paying for it. At first they were talking about $7 billion. Then it was $12 billion, then $16 billion. Now we are at $30 billion for a pipeline that, in 20 or 30 years, will no longer be used, because it will transport the dirtiest oil in the world, the most expensive to extract, and no one will want it anymore.
It is not surprising that the Liberal government is also authorizing projects like Bay du Nord, which once again means an increase in pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. It is not surprising that the Liberals and the Minister of the Environment, in February, issued oil and gas exploration permits off the coast of Newfoundland for 12,000 square kilometres of delicate marine ecosystems. They also issued exploration permits to ExxonMobil and to British Petroleum.
This is the Liberals' record: a government incapable of meeting its targets, as we learned in the environment commissioner's latest report, a government that authorizes oil and gas projects and has just given Canadian oil companies a leg up to continue to do what they do while asking all citizens and companies in our economy to make an extra effort.
The situation is disastrous. Do we remember the forest fires last summer? Do we remember the consequences of increasing natural disasters, as we call them? These disasters are in fact less and less natural: The science and all the reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC prove that they are becoming more frequent and intense, and have greater consequences on our economy, populations, and health.
There is a very interesting article today on Maria Neira, director of public health and the environment at the World Health Organization. She says that the air pollution that is causing respiratory problems and an increased incidence of asthma in young children is directly linked to the burning of fossil fuels. This is not a hypothesis. This is what is happening.
Both the Conservatives and the Liberals are being irresponsible and not taking measures to reduce the consequences of pollution and climate change on human life and health, but also on our economy and the future of our society and our communities.
People can count on the NDP. We will fight and take climate change seriously.
1406 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 12:13:33 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know how many emails, visits and phone calls the member has received from his neighbours about the cost of living. On this side of the House, we know that life is not affordable for Canadians and that this is a big problem, especially for the first nations.
First nations have filed a judicial review that says that climate “cannot be healed at the expense of” communities.
How does the member respond to that?
81 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 12:32:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as the saying goes, one step forward, two steps back. That is the impression I am getting from this debate. We are concerned about people who are struggling with the cost of living, and we are concerned about the housing crisis that is affecting our constituents. However, the Conservatives' proposal would do nothing to correct these situations, just like the government's climate change policies.
There is one thing that could be done. Canada is a petro-state, and climate change affects everything we are talking about: the price of groceries, agriculture, housing and food. In that context, how do the Conservatives aim to present a serious plan to address climate change?
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 12:47:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I sat through the speech of the Leader of the Opposition this morning, and we certainly know what he is against. He has waged a war against science. He has waged a war against climate change. He has waged a war against green infrastructure investments and the green economy. We know what he is against, but I am not certain we know what he is for at this point.
His campaign is not what he brags and boasts it to be. It is not an axe-the-tax campaign. It is actually an axe-the-facts campaign that he has waged against all the things I just referenced, and Canadians know that.
When will he present an environmental plan for Canadians that will actually do something, that is based on science, that will address climate change and all the issues that come with it? That is my question for the member.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 1:21:27 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member talks about facts. Is he willing to stand in this House and say that based on Canada's proportion of greenhouse gases in comparison to the United States, China, India and many other countries in this world, our weather systems in Canada are due to our responsibilities in the global climate change scenario?
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 1:21:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this shows how unserious that party is. If every country that had lower emissions than China and the United States said they did not have a responsibility on climate change, there would be no action on it. Countries like Ukraine have stepped up, and they have very small carbon footprints. What did the Conservative Party do? It voted against Ukraine.
The price on pollution is important and we need to move forward on it. It works and it puts more money back into the pockets of Canadians.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 2:16:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, “We are in the fight of our lives. And we are losing”. “We are experiencing a climate collapse in real time”. These strong words come from UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
Do his remarks seem undiplomatic? I would argue that he has the courage to speak those truths that deserve repeating on December 8, World Climate Day. Countries that are increasing their fossil fuel production have been branded dangerous nations that are throwing fuel on the fire. Canada, I would add, does the same while disguised as a firefighter. Whether we are speaking of the COP28 president or Canada's multibillion-dollar oil companies, their interests keep feeding the beast of climate change by capturing regulatory authority through their lobbying efforts, using public funds, and hypnotizing decision-makers with their greenwashing.
In six years, 2030 will be here. The Secretary-General says that we can prevent our planet from crashing and burning if we act now. Yes, but now is almost over.
168 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 2:20:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, a price on pollution is an important part of a climate plan, one that addresses affordability concerns. The vast majority of Canadians receive more money in the rebate than they pay in the price of pollution.
The only group to benefit from the Conservative plan to end the climate program and to end the rebate would be the top 20% of earners, while almost everyone else would be poorer as a result of their plan. The Conservatives are fighting for the rich; they are not fighting for Canadians who are concerned about affordability.
The carbon price is both a climate measure and an affordability measure.
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 2:37:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I expected no better from the Conservatives, who, in 2023, have opposed workers' rights and spread disinformation about housing.
They deny climate change. They want to reopen the abortion debate with Bill C‑311. They are betraying Ukraine. The one idea they had this year would financially harm eight out of 10 families. They are turning their backs on future generations when it comes to climate change. It is shameful.
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 2:41:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois talks a lot about the importance of respecting provincial jurisdictions and fighting climate change. Today, we did just that. Today, Quebec's minister of the environment, the fight against climate change, wildlife and parks, Benoit Charette, said that he welcomed the announcement of a cap and trade system for the oil industry, and that it was a good day for the environment and the economy.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 2:43:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canada has put in place a very ambitious plan, perhaps the most detailed in the world, to combat climate change. Today, we announced the world's first cap on oil and gas sector emissions. We are leading the way in this sector, and in the world, to combat climate change in a way that ensures we will have a strong and prosperous economy in the future.
68 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 3:01:12 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, being a farmer and part of a government that understands there is a problem with the climate, I know we have climate change. Climate affects the weather. Destructive weather destroys farms and destroys farm crops.
Quite simply, we have a program in place. Unfortunately, the Conservative Party of Canada does not have a plan to deal with the environment. With our plan, we are able to deal with the agricultural sector in clusters and with provincial governments right across the country to help farmers deal with climate change and become innovative.
We have more to do and we will continue to do it.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 3:02:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is clear the member does not agree with climate action. I wonder if his children would agree with climate action. It is going to impact next generations more than it affects us. When Conservatives show Canadians who they are advocating for, they take notice.
I would pose a question back to the Leader of the Opposition. As a family of four, he would have received $976 in climate action incentive payments. He lives in a taxpayer-funded mansion and gets driven around, so he does not buy very much gas himself. Did he cash the cheque?
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 4:16:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.
To follow up on what my Liberal colleague was saying, let us talk about climate change. What is going to be really costly to taxpayers? It certainly has to do with agriculture, but not with the carbon tax.
What farmers are telling us is that the lack of water is going to be costly. Crops lost to pests are going to be costly. Heat is having a real impact on livestock, productivity and reproduction. There is less snow, which protects the earth.
As a result of all of that, yes, it will be more costly. Climate change is here and it will be here for good if we do nothing to control it or reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. What does my colleague think of that analysis?
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 4:18:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to hear my good friend and hon. member from Coutts, Alberta. My question for him is twofold.
First, I heard the hon. member reference carbon dioxide in his remarks in what could only be considered a rather dubious way. Given the context, I have to ask this: Does the hon. member not agree with the overwhelming science that man-made greenhouse gas effects are a major cause of catastrophic climate change? Second, if he was so serious about reducing costs for consumers, how does he justify voting against our NDP opposition day motion to take GST off of home heating?
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/23 5:01:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, at this point, I normally say that I appreciate working alongside my colleague, but I am very adamant that I need to tell the truth at all times in this chamber.
If the Conservative member is concerned about first nations communities, will he commit to supporting the Assembly of First Nations' call for an additional $30 billion in climate adaptation funding for communities?
65 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/8/23 7:49:41 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we in the Liberal Party believe that climate change is real, so we are voting in favour of this motion with the hope that Conservatives will flip-flop on the issue.
I request a recorded division.
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
