SoVote

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Dec/7/23 3:30:30 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin is rising on a point of order.

14 words

Dec/7/23 3:30:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, again, it is against the rules of the House to mislead the House. The hon. member just said that any Canadian making $250,000 or less is not paying the carbon tax. That is patently false—

39 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Dec/7/23 3:30:42 p.m.
Watch

That is debate. The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

11 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Dec/7/23 3:30:47 p.m.
Watch

Welcome to the show, Madam Speaker. The Speaker should know, because she is sitting in the chair now for the first time, that this is the eighth point of order Conservatives have brought up on my speech trying to shut me down. We are going to see more of it. My 20-minute speech is probably going to be about 45 minutes. I take pleasure in knowing at least one Conservative will not be able to speak as a result of them continually cutting into my time like this. To that point, let me read to the member the facts from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Some 55% of households with incomes above $250,000 actually end up receiving more in rebates than they pay. That is the fact. Conservatives stand up in here and routinely, day after day, tell Canadians they are paying a carbon tax and it is contributing to all of the problems they have in their lives without even bothering to suggest they get more back than they put into it. This is unless of course someone is one of their rich friends, and probably somebody going to the $1,700 per person fundraiser that the Leader of the Opposition will be at tonight while all his MPs have to be in here voting. Those are the people they are actually talking to. Those are the people they are actually catering to. It is really important to reflect, and this is where I was going a few moments ago, on what is going on in the Conservative Party of Canada. Its members seem to be hung up on this narrative of using information and distorting the information in order to suggest to Canadians that what is happening to them is all at the hands of this Prime Minister, all at the feet of this Prime Minister, without actually reflecting on the reality. They use people's anxieties and fears to people's disadvantage. It is straight out of the alt-right Republican playbook of the MAGA Republicans. This is what we are seeing here. With what went on at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources yesterday and the way Conservatives acted, one would have thought it was Matt Gaetz who was the conductor of that ludicrous show of Conservative filibustering and Conservative antics. At one point, multiple Conservative MPs started filling up the room in an attempt to bully, intimidate, yell, heckle and scream in a committee meeting. This is literally the kind of material we see coming out of the U.S. Congress led by people like Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene and others on the right flank of the Republican Party. That is what we are seeing coming from the other side of the House. We are seeing MAGA politics, the politics of Donald Trump. We are seeing the politics of division, misinformation and the politics of profiting off anxieties and fears. That is what we see coming from the Conservative Party of Canada. Nowhere is that more clearly laid out than the manner in which Conservatives conducted themselves when it came to the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement. In that regard, the Conservatives intentionally voted against that deal, and for what reason? Nobody can really put their finger on it. Everything they seem to come out with is always about four weeks or five weeks after the fact. They never seem to be able to coherently explain to anybody, including the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, the President of Ukraine and Canadians, for that matter, why they voted against it. Instead, they linked it to what they have in today's opposition day motion. They link it to a price on pollution, to a carbon tax, and say they can never support this Ukraine free trade deal, even though the President of Ukraine and the Ukrainian Canadian Congress want it, because it has a reference to a carbon tax in it. This is notwithstanding the fact that the agreement says environmental policy cannot be imposed in the other jurisdiction. They do not even worry about that. What about the fact that Ukraine has had a price on pollution since 2011? It has had a carbon tax since 2011. Ukraine is more progressive than the Conservative Party of Canada. I am very concerned when I continually hear the narrative and the misinformation coming from the other side of the House that is led with an objective of dividing Canadians based on misinformation and information that is factually not true. They will do it routinely time after time after time. We see it with Conservatives on just about every issue. Yesterday, there was a very important private member's bill, for the House to establish a national food policy in schools across Canada and to develop the framework for it so we could work with provinces to implement it. We are the only G7 country without one. There are something like 338 million children in developed countries throughout the world who have access to food in schools. We are pretty much the only country in the developed world that does not, yet Conservatives are even against that. They stand up in the House, complain and go on at great lengths about how people are suffering throughout our country, but then routinely, as every opportunity comes before them to do something for people, they have more interest in trying to put a division through the government and into the minds of Canadians to try to influence them into giving it power. I think it is disgraceful that we have seen this time and again. Once again, there is another opposition day motion before the House. I think this is the 18th or 19th since the last election, when the Conservatives ran on pricing pollution, and here they are, for the 17th, 18th or 19th time, I cannot keep track anymore, bringing in a motion against it. It is ridiculous, when all of them ran on pricing pollution under Erin O'Toole's scheme in the last election, some of whom were even around in 2008 to run under Stephen Harper's government on implementing a price on pollution through a cap-and-trade model that other provinces and U.S. states had adopted. I think it is crazy that they are still coming at it from this perspective. At the end of the day, I think Canadians will hold them to this. Canadians will agree that it is not in the best interests of Canada or of our people to literally turn our back on the environment, on future generations and on what we can do now to make life less dramatic with respect to weather events and the changes that climate change will bring into the future. That is our responsibility. It is something we need to take seriously. I certainly hope all members of the House will reject the motion, for the 18th or 19th time, so we can finally put to bed the issue of a price on pollution. We have already been through three elections where we have run on this platform and committed to this policy. I do not think that we need any more discussion on it. Canadians have made it very clear where they stand on pricing pollution, especially when we consider that the vast majority of people get back more than they put in. Someone has to be fairly wealthy; have some luxurious goods, a large house and multiple fancy vehicles; and buy a lot of gas and fossil fuels in order to put themself in a position where they are paying more than they are putting in. It is time for Conservatives to start being honest about that and start telling Canadians the truth about the real impact the price of pollution will have on them.

1306 words

Rebates

Mr. Martin Shields (Bow River, CPC)

Dec/7/23 3:39:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, to my colleague across the way, I will say that I am in a constituency with 70% of the irrigation in the country, so when he talks about very rich people, they are not my constituents. When I last spoke about this, I had examples of many of the irrigating farmers paying more than $100,000 in carbon taxes a year, and there are thousands of them in my riding because of irrigation. If he questions that, he should come to my riding; I will introduce them to him, and he will see that. The constituents I represent grow on 4% of the arable land and bring in 28% of the GDP for ag in the province of Alberta. This is costing them because they grow 60 different kinds of products, which translates to expensive food in this country. I know them.

144 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Dec/7/23 3:40:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we heard another one of the member's colleagues earlier today say that he had asked the grocery store retailers who would end up paying the carbon tax that farmers and the grocery stores pay. According to one of the member's colleagues, and he can look it up in Hansard, it would be paid by consumers, as the costs would be transferred to them. All I have been trying to say for 20 minutes is that it is the consumer who ends up getting the rebate. The consumer gets the money back because, by the admission of his own colleague, those costs get passed on to the consumer. That is why what I am saying, and it comes from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, is correct; 94% of households get back more back than they put in. Yes, some people are paying directly through a line item on a utility bill. Other people are paying it through the manner in which it is passed on, like the member's colleague said. At the end of the day, we know it is the consumer who pays it and it is the consumer who gets the money back.

198 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Dec/7/23 3:41:50 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have just joined the debate for the last few minutes, listening to my colleague speak, and I heard my friend from southern Alberta, the province I am from, speaking about irrigation and the need for it. I have to say that the carbon levy is supposed to be part of a more comprehensive climate change strategy. I, like the member from Medicine Hat, will question whether this has been enough from the current Liberal government, because we have not seen from the government real action on climate change that has reduced emissions. The member brought up the idea that we need to deal with irrigation. Alberta has just had the driest November in a century because of the impacts of climate change. This is the same province that now has a Conservative government trying to coal mine the Rocky Mountains, which would destroy the irrigation from the Oldman River for southern Alberta. The Conservatives do not want to deal with the climate change aspect, which we have to deal with if we are going to be working with farmers. I would like my colleague from the Liberal Party to perhaps comment on the fact that the Liberals have not been able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at all, and the fact that the Conservatives will not even admit there is a problem.

225 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Dec/7/23 3:43:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there is a provincial Conservative government in Alberta that also put a moratorium on renewable energy projects. Can people imagine, in the year 2023, when the entire world is moving toward renewable energy, that a provincial government would put a moratorium on the innovation and the progress of where the world is moving to? That is not going to benefit Alberta in the long run. It might help a bit in the short run for a little political gain, but it is not going to help anybody in the long run. With respect to the member's question about meeting targets, I would much rather have very ambitious targets and not quite achieve them than have some lofty goals that are not realistic or that are overly easy to achieve. It is extremely important that when we do set these goals, we set them in a way that allows us to actually strive for something. I recognize that we are on target to meet our 2026 goals, and we are certainly on target to meet the 2030 goals, but I know that the member knows, because she cares about the environment so much, that this is not the kind of thing we accomplish overnight. We are talking about societal and cultural changes in the way that people behave in terms of everyday life. It is extremely difficult to encourage people to change behaviour when there is a political party in here, the Conservative Party of Canada, the opposition, that is actively doing the other thing and telling people, “No, no, what you are doing by burning fossil fuels is totally fine; keep doing this because, do not worry, we will get rid of this if we get elected.”

292 words

Mr. Vance Badawey (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, Lib.)

Dec/7/23 3:45:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as global market forces and inflation continue to hit Canadians, too many families are feeling the pressure of their monthly bills. Already, the Government of Canada has taken action on affordable child care, home retrofits, grocery prices and more. Now, we are taking an ambitious next step with a new energy affordability package. Can the member speak about energy affordability measures and what they include as we move forward with the package?

74 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Dec/7/23 3:45:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we are aware that, certainly while we go through this transition, energy is going to be a struggle for Canadians. That is why we are trying to work with Canadians to give them the resources and the tools they need to be able to transition away, in particular, from the very expensive fossil-fuel-based forms of energy that create a lot of carbon emissions and, as a result, the tax. That is why we are encouraging people to move toward heat pumps, for example, by giving rebates and giving incentives to do that. We will continue to invest in programs like that.

105 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

Dec/7/23 3:46:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague spoke at length about the positives of the carbon tax. However, the government itself has undermined its own policy, notably with its recent decision regarding heating oil in the Atlantic provinces. Is the government surprised that the Conservatives are now calling for this exemption to be extended to other target groups? I, for one, am not surprised at all.

63 words

Carbon

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Dec/7/23 3:46:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the premise of the question is wrong. The member is suggesting that it was just for Atlantic provinces. It is not. The carve-out for home heating with oil is across the entire country. In my province of Ontario, there are twice as many people who use oil as in Atlantic Canada. I will say, though, that I believe that this is not the case in Quebec, because Quebec actually has a very ambitious program to get off fossil fuels; one will not be not allowed to build a new house there, as of the end of this year, or even to renovate and replace one's heating system, with a fossil-fuel-based appliance. Those are the kinds of measures we need in this country. It becomes very difficult to do that when we are fighting against an opposition that does not even believe we have a problem.

151 words

Quebec
Fuels

Mr. Colin Carrie (Oshawa, CPC)

Dec/7/23 3:47:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I was a little concerned about the partisanship of my colleague's speech. The reason this is being brought forward is that Canadians right now are suffering. They are in a lot of pain. My colleague just admitted that Canadians will struggle when they have to use another form of energy. His colleague, my neighbour from Whitby, admitted last year that they knew that going to net zero is going to cause a lot of pain, and now we are going to get a quadrupling of the carbon tax. Could the member please let us know whether there are further policies that are in the pipe that will cause more pain and difficulty, such that Canadians will not be able to pay for a roof over their head and for food to feed their children?

137 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Dec/7/23 3:48:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, did members hear that? The member did again literally what I complained about in my entire speech. He said that the price on pollution is going to quadruple, but what did he forget to include? The rebate is going to quadruple, and 94% of Canadians get back more than they put in. The member refuses to stand up stand up and say that. Why will he not? It is the reality. Even if one makes $250,000 a year, 55% of Canadian households that make $250,000 a year still get more back than they put in. Why will he not say that when he stands up? It is because it does not feed his ultrapartisan talking points that the member for Carleton gave him.

127 words

Mr. Robert Kitchen (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC)

Dec/7/23 3:49:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner. I am very grateful to have an opportunity to speak to today's opposition day motion, because it is an issue that has been affecting the constituents in Souris—Moose Mountain significantly since the Liberal government came into power. Time and time again, the Prime Minister has made it clear that he does not support Canadian agriculture producers or care about their livelihoods. Nothing has made this more obvious than his refusal to remove the carbon tax from farmers. Since the Liberals do not seem to have any understanding whatsoever of the importance of agriculture, not just for Saskatchewan but for all of Canada, I would like to paint a little picture for them. Saskatchewan farms account for the biggest share of Canada's total farm area, at 39.2%, to be precise. It is among the world's largest exporters of various field crops, such as canola, and it leads the country in the cultivation of cereal grains, oilseeds and pulses. This means that, in many instances, when people put food on the table for themselves and their families, they can thank a farmer from Saskatchewan for producing it. In fact, I was speaking with the French ambassador to Canada on Tuesday. He told me that France, which happens to be a world leader in mustard, is extremely dependent on Saskatchewan's mustard seed crop, especially when we have droughts and the crop is poor. With 66.9% of Saskatchewan's total farm area being made up of cropland, which is more than two-fifths of Canada's total cropland, it is commonly called the breadbasket of Canada. Even the Statistics Canada website uses this phrase, so the federal government must be aware of what our farmers do to feed Canada and the world, as well as the benefits they bring to our country's economy. Why the government chooses to punish the very same farmers who work tirelessly, day in and day out, to bring the highest-quality produce from the farm to the table, I personally cannot understand. Farming is not an easy lifestyle. The days are long, with farmers getting up before sunrise and finishing their workday in the dark. They are at the mercy of nature, and as we all know in the House, the weather in Canada does not always co-operate with our wants and needs. Still, our farmers persevere, because they are dedicated to their work; they are willing to make sacrifices in order to get the job done. The least we can do is support them, yet the Liberals choose instead to tax them at every turn and make their lives harder by quadrupling the carbon tax on their input costs. This will only increase the cost of food for Canadians. Food insecurity is a real issue in Canada right now, and it is something that I have been concerned about for a number of years under the mismanagement of the Liberal government. According to Food Banks Canada, there were nearly two million visits to food banks in one month back in March 2023, an increase of 79% from 2019. This is an alarming statistic, especially when we factor in the Liberals' inability to control inflation and the cost of living crisis that so many Canadians are currently facing. From 2021 to 2022, the number of families who were food insecure increased by more than 12%, yet the Liberals are still forcing these very same families to pay a carbon tax on just about everything they buy. In fact, a new report that came out today shows that a family of four will pay $700 more next year on groceries; that is on top of the $1,065 extra that they paid this year. For many families, that amount of money is the difference between being able to pay the rent or keep the heat on for the winter and not being able to do so. Projections show that, in 2024, there will be a 2.5% to 4.5% increase in food prices, with meat, vegetables and bakery items rising from 5% to 7%. Because of these rapidly rising prices, Canadians across the country are reducing their expenditures on groceries, either by reducing the quantity or quality of food they are buying or by substituting less-expensive alternatives. We are now seeing the highest level of food bank usage in Canada on record, and the Prime Minister must answer for this. I would like to read a portion of the Food Banks Canada policy recommendations from its website. It states the following: Unfortunately, the story of 2023 is one of government inaction across the country. Our warning has largely gone unheeded—and the repercussions are clear, with nearly 2 million food bank visits in one month alone. The state of poverty and food insecurity in Canada has reached alarming heights. Despite the poverty rates being relatively low in historical terms, we are seeing signs that people in Canada are struggling profoundly. Food insecurity rates have skyrocketed, with nearly one in five Canadians finding it difficult to bring food to the table each day. The current financial challenges have resulted in growing mental health problems and stress related to finances. There is a palpable anxiety, with many people across the country growing increasingly concerned about how to meet their fundamental financial responsibilities, like paying their rent, filling up their car to get to work, and paying for necessary prescriptions. The lack of government action has only exacerbated the problems we were seeing a year ago, and in some cases, for decades prior. What I just read did not come from a partisan Conservative source, as the Liberals would probably like everyone to believe. It came from a reputable and well-established organization with the goal of seeing a Canada where no one goes hungry. What is a simple and straightforward way of doing this? It is to stop taxing the very farmers who produce the food, so the costs do not get passed on to the consumer. If we tax the farmer who grows the food and the trucker who ships the food, it is ultimately the consumer who pays that tax. The Liberals either do not understand this or do not care, and hard-working, average Canadians are paying the price for their apathy. Since the inception of the Liberal carbon tax, my office has been inundated with emails and letters from constituents who call on the government to axe the tax so they can make ends meet. People are so upset and frustrated that they are actually sending me copies of their power bills, something that has never happened before in my eight years as an MP. They want me to see just how much the Prime Minister is hurting them, especially those who live on a fixed income, such as seniors. I am going to share a few quotes from these letters, with the hope they resonate with members across the floor the same way they did with me. One email that was sent to the Liberal House leader and copied to my office says, “You can't be serious with your comment that the carbon tax is minimal in your interview with CTV. The prices of everything we are paying for have been affected! We, as Canadians, are suffering directly from the carbon tax! I'm asking you to please stop with the carbon tax if you really care about the citizens of Canada.” Another email, one that was accompanied by a copy of a power bill, reads: “I'd like to bring to the attention of the Prime Minister what it is like to live in rural Canada. We are so tired of hearing how easy it should be to use public transportation and not rely on natural gas. All those things that are available to large city dwellers. We do live in a town of 1500 people. My husband needed cancer surgery in July and we had to drive 3 hours one way to the hospital. In rural areas, there is no public transportation like taxis or buses that would take us to these appointments, let alone directly from our home to the hospital door. “Our vehicle gas bill is quite hefty.... Gas in our area runs around $1.40 per litre. We drive an SUV, but it still costs $500.00 approximately for the three trips needed every two weeks for my husband's medical condition.” I do not know how much clearer we can possibly be that the carbon tax is hurting Canadians and disproportionately hurting those who are already struggling to afford the necessities of life. To add insult to injury, the Prime Minister has chosen to provide an unfair carbon tax carve-out to those living on the east coast, while those living in the prairie provinces are given no relief whatsoever. According to the Liberal Minister for Rural Economic Development, if the Prairies want to be adequately represented in the House of Commons, they should have elected more Liberals. Apparently, the people of southeast Saskatchewan are not important enough in the Liberals' electoral math to get the same deal as those in Atlantic Canada. Furthermore, this came from the minister who is meant to represent all rural Canadians, not just those who vote Liberal. This kind of divisive statement continues to cement the fact that the government cares only about those who might be valuable to them when the next election rolls around. The Prime Minister has created two classes of Canadians: those who pay the carbon tax and those who do not. Canadians deserve a government that does the work for the people who do the work in this country, and that includes our farmers, their families and all those who pay taxes and contribute to our economy. Canadians do not want gimmicks or temporary measures. With that said, it is time for a change. It is time to stop taking money out of Canadians' pockets in the midst of an unprecedented cost of living crisis. It is time for a new Conservative government to bring it home for all Canadians.

1717 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Dec/7/23 3:59:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we know that the leader of the official opposition, the leader of the Conservative Party, lives in a government-provided house. He is also provided a government-expensed vehicle. I believe that the leader does not actually pay the “carbon tax”, as the Conservatives like to refer to it; yet, from what I understand, he does get a rebate. I am wondering if the member sees some irony there. Does he believe that his designate should be cashing in on the rebate, while at the same time not having to pay a carbon tax because both his home and his vehicle are provided through the government?

110 words

Mr. Robert Kitchen

Dec/7/23 4:00:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I find it quite interesting that the member takes this avenue when he truly understands that everybody, every Canadian who buys any food, pays the carbon tax. On top of that, every Canadian pays GST on that carbon tax, which amounts to millions and millions of dollars that the federal government collects; it says it is giving it back to everybody, but it does not. It takes that money, puts it somewhere and hands it out to whomever it chooses, and it appears to choose only people who vote Liberal.

92 words

Gst

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Dec/7/23 4:01:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the basic problem we face, a problem that has been going on for months, is that some political parties are unreasonable and put different misleading labels on all the others. Here is a prime example of this situation. Today's opposition day was triggered by Bill C‑234, which is currently in the Senate, and by the amendment that was passed in the Senate. Last week, we voted against a motion because some senators had been bullied, which is unacceptable in a G7 country. As a matter of principle, the Bloc Québécois opposed a motion, even though it was in favour of Bill C‑234. I rarely hear the Conservatives talk about that. All that I hear them say is that the Bloc-Liberal coalition is imposing a carbon tax. I wish we could be a little more conscientious and stick to the facts. I would like to ask my colleague the following. Does he acknowledge that some politicians here are trying to act reasonably for the common good and make compromises? That is what the Bloc Québécois did with Bill C‑234, which does not apply to Quebec. I would remind everyone that this bill does not apply to Quebec.

214 words

Mr. Robert Kitchen

Dec/7/23 4:02:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's very reasonable question. While I might respond that, a lot of times, I see the Bloc making issues that deal strictly with Quebec as opposed to all of Canada, his comment about Bill C-234 is very appropriate. I recognize that Bloc members voted for the bill when it was here in the House, where the people we represent are the common people of this country. Everybody voted for that. We supported it, and it was passed unanimously here in the House of Commons. It was then sent to the Senate, where it is being stalled and delayed. Therefore, I appreciate the member's comment and the support that the Bloc gave to Bill C-234. I look forward to the changes being made to Bill C-234 such that it is passed and helps our farmers.

144 words

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

Dec/7/23 4:03:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member knows that my grandpa's farm was in Asquith, Saskatchewan, and I spent much of my childhood out on that cattle farm, jumping on hay and picking eggs up from the chickens. However, I want to talk about corporate greed in the grocery stores. I worked in the grocery industry for over 20 years; every time a new product comes into a large corporation, the corporation wants hundreds of thousands of dollars from the supplier to get what is called a “listing” in the grocery stores. If it is tofu, cheese or any kind of product that a supplier wants to bring into a grocery store, that supplier is paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to do that. Where does the member think that money is being recovered from?

135 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 264