SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 331 - Jun/13/24

Jun/13/24 12:12:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that was pretty hilarious. I feel like I am being stoned to death with popcorn, with the insincerity coming from my colleagues. Let us talk about the abandonment of working-class people, when the member for Kelowna—Lake Country was bragging about making carbon and pollution free while her city was on fire during a climate crisis. Let us talk about how the member who lives in Stornoway, who has never actually had a job that we have been able to figure out, was flying up to Yukon to say that they are going to make pollution burning free while people were fleeing from their homes. As for the working class, the working class has a right to sustainable living, sustainable jobs and a sustainable future for their children. The Conservatives would burn that in a second if they could, if it meant giving Suncor some more money.

151 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Jun/13/24 12:13:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member started his speech today by talking about other things that we could have been talking about, other things that Conservatives could have brought forward in their opposition day motion. He acknowledged, and I think we all know, that this is just a reoccurring theme. Conservatives always want to talk about the same thing, about the price on pollution, and they want to continue to instill distrust in Canadians, when more than eight out of 10 get back more than they put in. The reality is that we are seeing this time and time again with Conservatives. They are basing their information on misinformation to try to mislead Canadians. For two months, they sat silent on the capital gains tax, to only suddenly, two days ago, push the rage farm button to activate all the trolls to do all of their dirty work for them. What does the member think about the position that the Leader of the Opposition has taken?

164 words

Speech

Mr. Charlie Angus

Jun/13/24 12:14:25 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I feel like I am being asked to make commentary on something that was going on inside the member's head. I do not know really what the question was, but then I never quite do. Let us talk about getting out more than what one puts in. Let us talk about Pathways Alliance and what they get out of Canada with putting less in. That is the question, I think, we should be asking the Liberals. Why do they continue to give Pathways Alliance such a free pass, when it is making $68 billion in profits and it has made it clear that it has no intention of lessening its emissions unless we pay for it? It wants us to pay 70% of the costs of this carbon capture scheme, which even it admits does not work. That is it. We put in a lot more and we get out a lot less from those guys.

159 words

Mr. Mario Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ)

Jun/13/24 12:15:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we saw in the motion that the Liberals seemed to be trying to prevent the release of the report. Earlier, we heard the Minister of Environment and Climate Change say that he had stopped subsidizing oil when in fact he continues to subsidize the oil companies in all manner of ways, including the pipeline and so-called carbon capture. What does my colleague make of this doublespeak?

69 words

Mr. Charlie Angus

Jun/13/24 12:15:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal government has no credibility when it comes to subsidies for the oil companies. Let us not forget that the public investment in developing the Trans Mountain pipeline was enormous. There were a lot of subsidies for helping with the expansion and the development of the oil companies, which led to an increase in GHG emissions in Alberta, without any plan to lower them. The question is: what about the GHG target? Mr. Trudeau made a promise, but where is the plan?

89 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Jun/13/24 12:16:32 p.m.
Watch

We cannot use other members' names, as the hon. member knows. Resuming debate, the hon. member for Vancouver East.

19 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

Jun/13/24 12:16:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an honour for me to rise in this House to enter into this debate. However, I must say that the debate before us is really a colossal waste of the House of Commons resources and the valuable time that we have in this chamber to debate urgent issues and situations. Why do I say that? The motion the Conservatives tabled is effectively calling for the government to table a set of data by June 17, 2024. What we do know is that the government did table a set of data. In fact, the Liberals tabled it today, albeit they should have made the information available right from the outset and should have been transparent with it. Notwithstanding that, that information is now before us. It begs the question why we are here debating a motion that is, frankly, not relevant anymore. It has already been addressed. In the meantime, what is happening in our communities? We have a situation in our communities, which is a housing crisis from coast to coast to coast. In fact, just today, I tabled a private member's bill to call on the government to use a human rights-based lens in addressing the housing crisis, something that the Liberals say they will honour under the National Housing Strategy Act. However, in reality, we know that is not being done. In fact, there are encampments all across the country where people cannot access the housing they need, adequate housing that they need. My private member's bill calls for the government to incorporate into the National Housing Strategy Act provisions that would disallow decampment on federal lands and to work collaboratively with other orders of government, other levels of government, to properly address the housing crisis. That is perhaps what we should be doing: focusing on how we can truly address the housing crisis, instead of having the Conservatives putting forward motions that are moot and have been made irrelevant already. I would also say that we have a situation with the immigration system, where there are a lot of issues. The government decided that it would bring in a cap on international students very suddenly, impacting international students who are now caught out in a very bad way. They would not be able to renew their work permit or their study permit because of the cap. Some of them are being exploited and taken advantage of. I just got an email from someone who told me that they were advised to go and marry someone, engage in marriage fraud, in order to find a path to stay here in Canada. That is not the path forward. We know that international students are struggling. They contribute, by the way, to Canada's economy, to our economic, social, cultural and educational communities. They should be valued instead of being blamed for the housing crisis that both the Liberals and the Conservatives have caused. It was the Conservatives who cancelled Canada's national co-op housing program in 1992. It was the Conservative leader who sat at the table and saw the Harper government lose 800,000 units of affordable housing for Canadians. Then it was the Liberals, in 1993, following the Conservatives, who cancelled the national affordable housing program. They also added to the loss of affordable housing in our communities. Therefore, instead of talking about a motion that is no longer relevant, we should be talking about how we are going to earnestly address the housing crisis, how we are going to ensure that those who are unhoused can live in dignity and how we can ensure that Canada will not only build more housing faster, but also build the kind of housing that Canadians can afford and can live in with dignity. We should be talking about how we should not allow decampment to take place, to further displace people who are unhoused in our communities, to marginalize them and to further put them at greater risks. If we want to, and we should, talk about the climate crisis, we should not talk about how we can enable the climate crisis to further escalate. I do not know if the Conservatives are blind to the fact that we have a climate crisis. They cannot continue to stick their heads in the sand and to deny this reality. In my community, in British Columbia, we had a weather-related crisis that happened in the heat wave that killed over 600 people. We had a fire that burned down an entire town, a flood that followed and a mudslide that continued to further escalate the climate crisis. We cannot pretend that this is not happening and that somehow the carbon tax is to blame. Let us just be clear about who is to blame and what action we need to take. Big oil needs to take responsibility, and those companies need to be held to account. The government, the Liberals, refuse to take the action that is necessary to deal with the climate crisis. The Liberals refuse to ensure that big oil pays its fair share. The Liberals refuse to stop subsidizing the oil and gas industry. Why are they doing that when the oil and gas industry is actually making record profit. It is to the detriment of everyday Canadians, to our collective detriment. When the earth is burning, and it literally is with the wildfires and the forest fires that are taking place, we cannot just sit in the House and blame the carbon tax. What planet are we from? If we continue to go down this track, we are not going to address the climate crisis, which is desperately in need of action. We should be saying to Suncor that we are sorry, but it has made over $2.8 billion in the fourth quarter of 2023, and enough is enough; we are going to make sure that we stop the subsidies for the oil and gas industry and that the industry is made to do its part to address the climate crisis. Madam Speaker, let me say this. We also have a responsibility in the international community to address the climate crisis because there are more people being displaced as a result of weather-related situations. Therefore, we have a collective responsibility to do what is right. There are many issues we need to debate, and debate seriously, but not a motion to which the very data that the Conservatives want has already been tabled. With that, I welcome questions.

1092 words

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

Jun/13/24 12:26:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I know that housing is important to the member, and she spoke about it during her intervention. At the housing committee, just a few hours ago, we heard that higher capital gains taxes will have a negative effect on home building. This was a statement made by the chief economist of Canada's largest construction association. Why would the member, along with the rest of her NDP colleagues, continue to prop up the Liberal government and vote, just yesterday, for tax increases that would hurt home building in Canada during a crisis of home affordability?

97 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan

Jun/13/24 12:27:12 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, let us be very clear about the housing crisis and what has caused it. Successive Liberal governments and Conservative governments have helped to create the housing crisis we are in by allowing for the financialization of housing and for big developers to use renovictions to displace people so that they lose their homes. Under the Conservatives, we already know that Canada has lost more than 800,000 units of housing. The Conservative leader called community housing “Soviet-style” housing. That is shameful. The government could address the housing crisis by building housing that Canadians need and can afford.

102 words

Mr. Chad Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, Lib.)

Jun/13/24 12:27:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague that today's motion is nonsensical. It is just a regurgitation of the motions we have seen over the last number of months when we could be and should be debating more important issues, like housing and the environment. The Leader of the Opposition was in Hamilton recently as part of his “make Canada great again tour”. He made no reference to, or had no ideas about, how to get out of the housing crisis. He provided no plan as it relates to combatting climate change. I wonder if the member can speak to why it is so important that we provide options and alternatives for Canadians as it relates to those two very important issues.

125 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan

Jun/13/24 12:28:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the truth is that Conservatives are only focused on slogans. They somehow think that the slogan “axe the tax” will actually fix the housing crisis. It will not. What we need, to address the housing crisis, is for Canada to be, at the very minimum, on par with the G7 countries with respect to our community housing stock. Right now, at 3.5%, it is less than half of where they are. We will not address the housing crisis if we continue to go down this track. Significant investments need to be made. The kind of housing that needs to be built is the kind that Canadians can afford. That is at the core of the issue.

121 words

Mr. Luc Desilets (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, BQ)

Jun/13/24 12:29:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague, who is quite worked up today, what she thinks about the motion before us. It is basically a request for information, so I find it rather odd that we are spending a full day debating it. What does my colleague think?

50 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan

Jun/13/24 12:30:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, today's debate on this motion is an entire waste of time for members of Parliament and a waste of the resources required to keep the House running, because the information the Conservatives say that they want has already been tabled. It makes the entire motion completely irrelevant to this debate today.

54 words

Tabled
Waste

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

Jun/13/24 12:30:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vancouver East, who is a tremendous advocate. I would have to say that I agree with her that this is a totally irrelevant motion because the information has already been tabled. I find that it is another opportunity for Conservatives to axe the facts, including the fact that we are in a climate emergency. Their party is still arguing about whether the world is round or flat. I wonder if the member could speak specifically to how the climate emergency is impacting the folks who are currently unsheltered. I know the Conservative leader talks a lot about tent cities, which he regularly demeans. I wonder if she could comment on that.

121 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan

Jun/13/24 12:31:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my colleague for her tremendous advocacy and for using a human rights-based lens with respect to everything she does. On addressing the situation of the housing crisis and how climate relates to it, people are being displaced. We had a heat wave in my community of Vancouver East, in British Columbia, and 600 people died. There are people who are unhoused or are living in tent cities because they do not have access to adequate—

86 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Jun/13/24 12:31:57 p.m.
Watch

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent.

9 words

Mr. Gérard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC)

Jun/13/24 12:32:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Calgary Rocky Ridge. I am very pleased to participate in this debate, and I thank my colleagues. We are gathered here today because Canadians have a right to know, and it is our duty, as the official opposition, to hold the government to account. We want to know the real impact that the Liberal carbon tax is having on Canadians' wallets and on the Canadian economy. We are holding this debate today to get to the bottom of things, so that people can form an opinion based on the facts, facts that the government wanted to hide. The government did not just want to hide this information from the public. We are holding this debate today because of what the Parliamentary Budget Officer said about his requests. I would remind the House that, last week in committee, my colleague from Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley questioned the Parliamentary Budget Officer. My colleague from Manitoba had a very good conversation with the PBO a few days ago in the committee. I will summarize the exchange that took place at the Standing Committee on Finance. My colleague said, “Mr. Giroux, in your earlier testimony, you said that you understood that the government had economic analysis on the carbon tax that it has not released. Are you saying that the government has not been transparent with the analysis it has?” The Parliamentary Budget Officer replied, “I mentioned that the government has economic analysis on the impact of the carbon tax itself and the OBPS, the output-based pricing system. We've seen that—staff in my office—but we've been told explicitly not to disclose it and reference it.” That last bit is important. That is what the Parliamentary Budget Officer told the committee. My colleague from Manitoba went on, “The government has given you their analysis, but they have put a gag on you, basically, saying you can't talk about it.” The PBO replied, “That is my understanding.” A government is muzzling the Parliamentary Budget Officer. If that is not keeping an iron grip on information to conceal matters that directly affect Canadians, I do not know what is. That is why we deliberately moved this motion to hold this debate and force the government to do what it did not want to do. It wanted to hide information. The government even told the Parliamentary Budget Officer to shut up. That is what it said. The government told the Parliamentary Budget Officer not to reference it. Unfortunately, this brings back very sad memories of a time long ago when one Quebec politician could tell another to shut up. Sadly, we are seeing the same thing happening again today, in 2024, under this Liberal government. What did we find out next? This morning, just a few minutes before the House started, the government stated that it had released the documents in question. What does this partial documentation tell us? The news for Canadians is very bad. It says in black and white that the carbon tax's true impact on the economy is minus $30.5 billion until 2030. If I were in government, I might not be very proud of these numbers either, but numbers and facts are stubborn. We Conservatives have been pushing for months to get the real numbers. We are adding even more pressure with today's debate. With a bit of theatrics, the government tabled the documents a few minutes before the House began sitting. As the Leader of the Opposition said, painting a somewhat graphic and rather gross picture, it was as painful for them as having a tooth pulled, and for good reason, because the tooth was rotten. Canada's gross domestic product, or GDP, will drop by $30.5 billion by 2030. That is the real effect of the Liberal carbon tax. This was not the first time the Parliamentary Budget Officer highlighted the fact that the carbon tax is going to cost Canadians a lot of money, much more than the government claimed when it said it was going to put the money back into their pockets. It is pretty amazing. These people keep telling us that there is a price on pollution but they are putting money back into people's pockets. That is because they collect the money, take out a little bit and put the rest back in the taxpayers' pockets. Do they think people are stupid? In any case, I can say one thing: Canada's mayors did not find it funny. A few days ago, the Prime Minister was invited to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, or FCM. Once again, he repeated his famous line about Canadians getting more money back than they pay. Canada's mayors did not find it funny and started heckling him. The Prime Minister responded, “Ha ha”. That was his response. His arrogance is unfortunate. It is insulting to Canadians. On May 5, in an interview on CTV's Power Play, the Parliamentary Budget Officer had this to say: “A vast majority of people will be worse off under a carbon pricing regime than without, and we don't expect that to change.” In the same interview, he went on to say the following: “The overall conclusions that the vast majority of households are worse off with the carbon pricing regime than without, that I'm confident will still remain. That is based on our own preliminary analysis but also on discussion we've had on discussions with government officials and also stakeholders.” This is not the first time the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said that the Liberal carbon tax is having a negative impact on taxpayers' wallets. He costed the negative impact on the Canadian economy and estimates that Canada's GDP will take a $30.5-billion hit by 2030. Earlier a minister tabled a series of documents and I asked him some questions about those documents. It reminded me that there is another document that I have been trying to table in the House for months, specifically the report presented to COP28 in December entitled “Climate Change Performance Index 2024”. It shows the results of 67 countries around the world and their actual effectiveness in the fight against climate change. Where does Canada rank after nine years under the Liberal government? On a list of 67 countries, after nine years of a Liberal government, Canada's Liberal effectiveness, as analyzed by scientists around the world, ranks 62nd out of 67 countries. Meanwhile, the Liberals are lecturing everyone else. They say that we are not nice, but they are good. They are so good that Canada ranks 62nd after nine years of this government's management. For months I have been calling for this document to be tabled. The Liberals keep refusing. That is not nice. What did the minister say in answer to my question about that? He said that the member, referring to me, knows very well that oil development in Alberta is hurting our track record. The cat is out of the bag. That is the minister's problem. In his ideal world, there would be no more oil anywhere. I do not know what planet he is living on, but that is not the reality. Perhaps his ultimate dream is to completely shut down Canada's oil industry, but what will happen if we do that? Oil development will happen elsewhere. Shutting down Canada's industry tomorrow morning will not change much. That is the problem. We need oil. I am a Quebecker and I keep an eye on what is happening in my province. According to HEC Montréal's numbers, last year, Quebeckers consumed 19 billion litres of oil, which represents an increase of 7%. That is not good news or bad news, it is a fact. The numbers are there. Everyone can draw their own conclusions. If oil production in Canada were to be shut down tomorrow morning, other places would produce it. Who stands to gain if the Liberal government's dream, the minister's dream, comes true? Unfortunately, the Canadian economy does not figure heavily in the minister's dreams. The planet does not stand to gain, but Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other countries do. That is the big problem with Liberal dogmatism, in contrast to the Conservatives' pragmatism. When the Liberals say that the carbon tax will reduce emissions, that is not true. What it will reduce is the amount of money in taxpayers' pockets. The Canadian economy will suffer because of this.

1461 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Jun/13/24 12:41:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, on the last point that the member made, he is factually incorrect. He has said that there will be no impact in terms of reduction of GHG emissions. However, the data that the Conservatives begged and pleaded for to be released, data they claimed there was a gag order for it not to be released, the data that the member now has in his hands shows that the total reduction so far in GHG emissions is 80 million tonnes and projected to be 25 million tonnes per year. Therefore, for the member to get up in the House moments ago and completely disregard the data that his party begged to get for weeks, which he now has in his hands, is complete misinformation and false.

127 words

Mr. Gérard Deltell

Jun/13/24 12:42:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is very sad to hear the member say that. The truth is that the real impact on the economy is terrible, minus $30.5 billion until 2030. There will be a direct impact on family households of $1,800. If everything were perfect with the Liberal carbon tax, we may have seen the real impact of it. However, based on the evaluation made, not by the Conservative Party, the Fraser Institute or L’institut économique de Montréal but by the United Nations, especially scientists around the world, after nine years of the government, Canada is 62 out of 67. I am sorry folks, but it does not work.

115 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

Jun/13/24 12:43:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I was very interested in what my colleague had to say. He even made a historical reference to Maurice Duplessis, which is always nice. That is kind of like what he experienced this morning, is it not? By providing the data, it is almost as though the government told the Conservatives to zip it. Now, here we are talking about this motion. Ever since this morning, people have been talking about whatever they please. We are not making much progress, but at least I can ask my colleague from the Quebec City region a fairly relevant question. What does he think of his leader's assertion that he will not invest a penny in the Quebec City tramway?

120 words