SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 314 - May/22/24

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/22/24 12:18:39 a.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry.

10 words

May/22/24 12:18:42 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it gets bad in hospitals. The president of the B.C. Nurses' Union confirmed it and “said the maternity ward of Victoria General Hospital is now equipped with a special device to detect harmful particulate matter such as smokable drugs. A light goes off to warn health care staff that potentially harmful substances are in the air so they can wear a respirator for protection.” That is what happens when this Prime Minister, the NDP and the Liberals got together for their radical drug decriminalization plan. My follow-up is a key question. Will the Liberals and the NDP support our safe hospitals act, our common-sense Conservative plan, to make sure that these types of experiments will never be allowed in hospitals again, to protect our health care workers and, most importantly, a second important key part the government did not address in that first part, will they rule out ever expanding this type of failed experiment anywhere else in this country, yes or no?

170 words

Mrs. Élisabeth Brière

May/22/24 12:19:46 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we will continue to work with British Columbia, the other provinces and territories and all of our partners to address specific needs and support public health and safety. Law enforcement partners have been clear. They do not want to arrest people for personal drug possession, but rather they want the necessary tools to address issues of public safety. They support a comprehensive public health approach to addressing substance use harms where they can redirect someone away from the criminal justice system to available and accessible health and social services. Our government's approach to dealing with this crisis is comprehensive and co-operative. It includes measures necessary to save lives, monitor its actions and make any necessary adjustments.

120 words

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

May/22/24 12:20:42 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask for further details about the impact the carbon tax is having upon Canadians, but what I would like to highlight in the next couple of minutes is the common-sense proposal the Conservative Party leader, the member for Carleton, has put forward to give Canadians a much-needed break for the summer. The carbon tax is costing Canadians significantly. The price of food for an average family is up more than $700 for this year compared to last year. There are a record two million visits to a food bank in a single month. We saw the carbon tax rise on April 1 a shocking 23%. Common sense shows that if one taxes the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who ships the food, the store that sells the food and the person who has to go to pick up the food, the cost of food rises. It is driving up the cost of everything. This year, the Prime Minister and the NDP-Liberal carbon tax will cost families in Alberta almost $3,000 a year. In Saskatchewan, it is more than $2,600 a year, and in Manitoba, more than $1,700 a year. In Ontario it is $1,670 a year, and in Nova Scotia, $1,500 a year. In Prince Edward Island, it is $1,600 a year, and in Newfoundland and Labrador, $1,870 a year. Canada-wide, the average cost to Canadians is nearly $2,000. That is the cost even when calculating the rebate. The net cost to families is nearly $2,000 a year, which is crippling at a time when inflation is up and Canadians are simply looking for a break. That is why only a number of days ago, the common-sense Conservative leader, the member for Carleton, called for a tax holiday, to cancel all of the federal government taxes on gasoline and diesel to help Canadians and give them a much-needed break so they can maybe afford not only to buy the necessities that are required to raise a family, and that seniors require to get by, but also to make sure they have the chance to live out a little bit of the Canadian dream. Maybe that is going on a road trip or maybe it is driving their kids to sports. It would give them that chance and ensure that a much-needed break is given. The question I asked a number of months ago in relation to the carbon tax is very simple: Will the member speak out in favour of the common-sense proposal to cancel the federal government's fuel taxes on gasoline and diesel to give Canadians a much-needed break from Victoria Day to Labour Day? That would mean cancelling the carbon tax, cancelling the federal fuel tax and cancelling the GST so Canadians can afford that little bit of hope, that little bit of a break that is so very needed at a time when Canadians are suffering so much.

508 words

Mrs. Élisabeth Brière (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development and to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health, Lib.)

May/22/24 12:24:20 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to explain again to the hon. member that putting a price on pollution is at the centre of the government's plan to fight climate change and curb its devastating effects on our communities and economy. The negative impacts of climate change are very real. The public will not soon forget the destructive force of last year's forest fires that scorched much of Canada and choked our communities, which were cloaked in thick smoke. It would be irresponsible of us to stand idly by. We are proposing solutions to deal with our rapidly changing climate. Standing still is unacceptable. We must act. Our efforts are not just to benefit our generation; they are to benefit future generations of Canadians, our children and their children. Our government is taking the necessary steps that will have effective, concrete impacts, and a vital part of the plan is Canada's price on pollution. Without a doubt, pollution has a cost. Applying a price on carbon pollution is widely recognized as one of the most efficient ways to reduce emissions. What is more, this way of proceeding means that the price on pollution remains affordable to Canadians. We sometimes hear, particularly in the House, that putting a price on pollution costs Canadians too much. I can assure members that this statement is completely false. In fact, in the provinces where the federal pollution pricing applies, people get back a large part of the revenues generated, and low-income earners benefit the most. This means our system is helping with the cost of living for a majority of Canadian families, while encouraging choices that will help Canada lower its emissions. Our price on pollution ensures that eight out of 10 households in these provinces are receiving more money back through quarterly Canada carbon rebate payments than they pay. Thanks to our government's pollution pricing mechanism, a family of four living in one of these provinces can receive up to $1,800 in 2024-25. As members can see with our plan, we are not only fighting climate change, but we are also returning money to Canadians. The government does not keep any direct proceeds from federal pollution pricing. Instead, the government returns the money collected to households, small and medium-sized businesses, farmers and indigenous governments. International experts agree that our pollution pricing mechanism is an effective way to fight climate change. With this approach, we are sending a clear message that pollution has a price, and as we know, it absolutely does. Putting a price on carbon pollution encourages reduction across the economy, while giving households and businesses the flexibility to decide when and how to make changes. Removing pollution pricing, as the Conservatives have called for, would eliminate its powerful incentive to encourage people and businesses to pollute less. Removing pollution pricing, as the Conservatives have called for, would only confirm that they do not want to fight climate change and they do not have a plan.

504 words

Mr. Damien Kurek

May/22/24 12:28:04 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have two words: false and failure. That describes exactly what the member just said. It is false that families get more back than they pay into it. The Parliamentary Budget Officer made that very clear. When the net cost, which is the impact the carbon tax has on the economy, is calculated, 60% of Canadians end up paying more. There is also the negligible cost for many who do receive a rebate, but it certainly does not have the impact that the member is saying it has. It is a failure when it comes to addressing the environment. It is not working. Why does the member, and the Liberals, propped up by the cowardly NDP, continue to blame single moms driving their kids to soccer practice, families that want to go on vacation, and grandparents who want to see their grandkids? Why are they blaming those people for the challenges facing the country and making them pay more? Why not adopt our common-sense proposal, which is to axe the taxes on fuel this summer—

179 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/22/24 12:29:06 a.m.
Watch

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

4 words

Secretary

Mrs. Élisabeth Brière

May/22/24 12:29:08 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, is the member calling into question the opinion of over 300 experts in Canada who have clearly demonstrated that pollution pricing is the right way to go? What we are doing is protecting people from the dangers and costs of climate change and ensuring that Canada continues to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Not only does our price on pollution help combat climate change, but it is also giving more money back directly to Canadian families at a time when so many need it the most.

88 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/22/24 12:29:44 a.m.
Watch

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until later this day at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). (The House adjourned at 12:29 a.m.)

41 words