SoVote

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

Jun/13/24 4:16:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, unlike the cabinet retreats that the member opposite's government takes at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer, we know that not a dime of taxpayer money was spent on that trip. It was a very important trip to understand the U.K. point of view, which is much farther ahead of us with respect to reversing its changes on carbon tax, and to have the incredible opportunity to meet the Hon. Tony Abbott, who also fought a carbon tax election. It is no surprise that when Australians were running out of money, as Canadians are, Tony Abbott won that election handily, as we expect to happen here as soon as the frightful and running-scared coalition is able to call an election in this country. We know that, when the carbon tax election comes along, it will be no problem for the Conservatives to have power in Canada and reverse the incredible, costly and ridiculous charges that the government has foisted on Canadians now for nine long years.

171 words

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

Jun/13/24 4:17:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, a journalist from The Canadian Press published an article on March 26 about an open letter on the carbon tax signed by 165 Canadian economics professors. The letter states the following: As economists from across Canada, we are concerned about the significant threats from climate change. We encourage governments to use economically sensible policies to reduce emissions at a low cost, address Canadians’ affordability concerns, maintain business competitiveness, and support Canada’s transition to a low-carbon economy. Canada’s carbon-pricing policies do all those things. In the article, the journalist says the following: According to the director of the department of economics at Université Laval, Stephen Gordon, economists are “almost unanimous” that carbon pricing is the best way to fight climate change. He then adds, citing the content of the letter, and look at how wonderful it is: “Not only does carbon pricing reduce emissions, but it does so at a lower cost than other approaches”, according to the economists, who say “that is...common sense”. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about that.

191 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis

Jun/13/24 4:19:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, realistically, we need to focus on all this talk about the need for an affordable change to protect the climate. When Canadians cannot afford to eat, heat or keep a roof over their heads, the plan is not affordable for Canadians. As I said during my speech, before I was so rudely interrupted, we know, clearly, that Canadians are no longer able to do those things. When one is not able to eat, house oneself or keep the heat on in the winter, it becomes an unbearable prospect. Should I look at saving the climate, or should I feed my family? I know from the Canadians I hear from every day that they need to choose to eat first. What we will do on this side of the House is to have a technological plan to fight climate change. That will be significantly better. It will support Canadian businesses, which will employ more people and bring in more tax revenue. This will give us the ability to look forward into the future to say this is how we need to do things. It is not about continuing to take money out of the pocket of Canadians and give it to the green slush fund so that the Liberals can give it to their friends and waste millions more dollars. It is an easy prospect, and an easy choice for Canadians to make, to get the minister of the environment to resign.

243 words

Ms. Rachel Blaney (North Island—Powell River, NDP)

Jun/13/24 4:20:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will do my best to be quick. I know that the member and I have a fairly different perspective, but I agree that a lot of people are struggling right now. I hear that in my riding. I also represent a rural riding and understand that transportation is a challenge, and an important one, that I think could be addressed in a lot of different ways. I also am aware of how much money the oil and gas companies are getting. I looked it up: They made $63 billion in profits in 2022, while oil prices soared. The reality is that they are seeing a bigger profit than they have in a long time. We can talk about tax. I am happy to have that discussion, but I think it is also important to talk about price gouging. Has the member spent any time actually doing some research into that aspect of this concern?

157 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis

Jun/13/24 4:21:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to live in the member's part of the world, North Island—Powell River and Comox. I am not sure if it is exactly in that riding. I also know that the people of that area of this great country are not dissimilar from the folks I now represent in Nova Scotia, in the sense that they cannot afford $1,800 a month coming out of their pocket and a $30.5- billion hit to this economy. I know they cannot afford that. I know that the member is also getting the same emails and calls from people who cannot put food on the table every single day, just as we are here on this side of the House. Therefore, again, let us have a resignation from the minister of the environment.

139 words

Mr. Eric Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, CPC)

Jun/13/24 4:22:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, sadly, after nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, time and time again despite its promises, the reality of what is actually happening here in Ottawa is the polar opposite. Before the Prime Minister came into office, he said he was going to have the most transparent and accountable government Canadians had ever seen. Fast-forward nine years, and it has never been worse. The open-by-default promise the Prime Minister made is blown and completely decimated. Here we are again, with months and months of a continued, in this case, carbon tax, cover-up, where the independent Parliamentary Budget Officer has been gagged. He is not able to provide to the public, not only the House but all Canadians, the real numbers and the real facts on the impacts and the proof of the negative impacts of the carbon tax plan currently under way and set to expand significantly and make life even more unaffordable in the coming years. We see the reality on the ground every day, regardless of what part of the country someone comes from. Food bank use has skyrocketed; two million Canadians are using a food bank in one month. Even with the increase so bad, it is expected that a million more visits will be made to food banks in Canada this year alone. Canadians are going to pay $700 more on their grocery bill in 2024. Every metric with respect to trying to make life more affordable, to give Canadians some relief, is getting worse, not better, the longer the Liberals are in office. Here are the games the Liberals tried to play and failed miserably on today. For months, we have called on the Liberals to allow the Parliamentary Budget Officer to table the full report that he has been gagged about. He cannot speak about it. He cannot make it public. He cannot show Canadians the facts we all know on the ground but that would be proven through the work that he has done. Just as we started to debate our opposition motion on document production, which would order the government to release the full report and show all the homework today, the Liberals played a game. They tabled, to the CBC of all places, spreadsheets, bits and parts of the report, in an attempt to say, “Here you go; here's the information.” Like everything with the Prime Minister, and everything that the Liberals do these days, propped up of course by the NDP, we cannot trust the Liberals, and rightfully so. They have earned that reputation after nine years here in Ottawa. What the data has shown so far today confirmed what Conservatives have been saying all along and what millions of Canadians are feeling in their communities in the past couple of years. The government plans to quadruple the carbon tax on the price of gas and diesel in the coming years to 61¢ a litre, with the first carbon tax, the second carbon tax being brought in, and of course the tax they taxed with GST as well. The report and the numbers that we have seen so far today show just how devastating it will be. There will be a $30-billion hit to the Canadian economy in the coming years. It is a massive hit to our GDP, our economic growth, our potential and our engine that is already stalling under the current NDP-Liberal regime. What does that mean? Every Canadian family, with the Liberal carbon tax plan, not just at the rates that they are at but with the plan to drastically increase them, will be hit by $1,800 per year just from the carbon tax. This is at a time when Canadians are already hurting, at a time when our federal deficits are endless, with no plans to balance the budget, and at a time when Canadians desperately need more houses but fewer houses are getting built. Everything the Liberals touch is broken. Everything they touch gets worse. The more solutions and photo ops they claim to do, the worse it gets for Canadians. Here we go. The government has known for months just how devastating the carbon tax is, and for months it has just blocked it from even being talked about. They gag the Parliamentary Budget Officer. They claim the carbon tax is so great and people are further ahead after all the carbon tax money the government collects is redistributed. If it is so true and if that is correct, why are the Liberals hiding the report? Why do they not table the full documentation with the report and everything included, not just the morning of? Finally, when they get backed into a corner, when they know they have to do something, they do not do the right thing and produce everything; they sliver off something and give it to the CBC the morning of and try to say that their work is done. We see the first part. We see the $30-billion-a-year hole it is going to blow in our GDP and in our Canadian economy when the carbon tax gets even larger on the price of gas and on home heating, driving up the cost of everything. It is endless how much the carbon tax impacts Canadians: the price of gas for families to go around on their own and the price of diesel for trucking companies to transport food, furniture, goods and supplies. The carbon tax is driving up the cost there as well. In aviation, there is a carbon tax on plane fuel, and airlines use tens of billions of litres. The government is driving up the cost of every mode of transportation and driving up the cost of living. Therefore we need full accountability, not the game the Liberals tried to play today of tabling something minutes after debate started and saying that it is enough. It is not enough. Canadians are sick and tired of the games the Liberals play. They were sick and tired when the Prime Minister bragged about the line “open by default” and said that the government would just share all the information and let the chips lie down. Now the government is blocking. I have never seen this. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has a report and would like to make it public. He has both hands tied behind his back, and backbench Liberal MPs are taking shots at him. There is a report that can vindicate the good, independent work that this public servant is doing. The Liberal government has gagged him, and then it played the game this morning of tabling only selective pieces: some Excel spreadsheets and numbers, not the full picture. It is important that Canadians see the full report, not only the report or the numbers that the Liberals tried to show today. They need to show their homework. They need to provide their sources. The Parliamentary Budget Officer needs the ability to show the work that he did and how he got to the numbers showing just how devastating the carbon tax is, the economic vandalism that is going to be further exacerbated the more the carbon tax goes up. On this side, we are going to be very clear. The entire House, the Bloc, the NDP, the Greens, the Liberals and everybody must allow full transparency, when it comes to the work of the Parliamentary Budget Officer in the report, so in my remaining time I would like to move an amendment, just so we are clear to Canadians and in the vote that will be taking place this evening. I move: That the motion be amended by replacing the words “provided that it” with the following: “, together with any bilingual memoranda or other briefing materials prepared in relation to this analysis, provided that these documents”. It is time for full transparency. It is time for all of the information. Allow the Parliamentary Budget Officer to be ungagged and show all of his homework, and let Canadians see just how devastating life is after the carbon tax and after nine years of the Liberal-NDP government.

1371 words

Ottawa

The Deputy Speaker

Jun/13/24 4:31:42 p.m.
Watch

It is my duty to inform hon. members that an amendment to an opposition motion may be moved only with the consent of the sponsor of the motion. If the sponsor is not present, the House leader, the deputy House leader, the whip or the deputy whip of the sponsor's party may give or refuse consent on the sponsor's behalf. Since the sponsor is not present in the chamber, I ask the deputy House leader if he consents to this amendment being moved. The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

96 words

Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC)

Jun/13/24 4:32:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, given the political games that the government has been playing today, I believe that this amendment is entirely relevant and advisable. I therefore agree to my colleague's moving the amendment.

33 words

The Deputy Speaker

Jun/13/24 4:32:34 p.m.
Watch

The amendment is in order. Questions and comments, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety.

18 words

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs (Cybersecurity), Lib.)

Jun/13/24 4:33:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite spoke about transparency, so I am wondering whether he will be transparent with the House and Canadians on how Conservatives will address climate change. The Conservatives' slogan about technology does not provide any details. How are they going to actually support Canadians in dealing with climate change? How are they going to invest in communities to make them more resilient? Can they be specific?

69 words

Mr. Eric Duncan

Jun/13/24 4:33:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will take our Conservative slogan of “technology, not taxes” any day of the week over the member's slogan of “Boo hoo, get over it”. I will not take any lectures from her on slogans and how that is working for her. To the question at hand of what we have been very clear on, a number of clean-energy projects have been proposed across this country, but because of red tape by the government specifically, they have been withdrawn. In Nova Scotia, for example, a tidal energy company wanted to bring forward projects that would create jobs and clean energy, and have an impact in reducing our emissions. What did it say? It said there is so much red tape, so much confusion and so many delays. I think it is a testament that the government could not organize a two-car parade, as we would say back home. The company cancelled its project. When it comes to nuclear and clean energy projects right across this country, a number of companies are backing out. Conservatives will get rid of the red tape and allow investment to move ahead, not tax Canadians with a carbon tax that does nothing to address climate change.

210 words

Ms. Sylvie Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, BQ)

Jun/13/24 4:34:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let us talk a bit about history. In 1904, Wilfrid Laurier said that “the 20th century shall be the century of Canada”. While that could be true, what is clear is that the 21st century is the century of Quebec. Each Quebecker produces 2.5 times less greenhouse gas emissions than an Ontarian, six times less than an Albertan and seven times less than an individual in Saskatchewan. In a world where polluting is expensive and protecting the environment pays, Quebec is the new Klondike. By trying to prolong the oil and gas heyday of the 20th century a few years longer, the Conservatives are doing everything they can to stop Quebec from enjoying its comparative advantage. My question for the Conservatives is this: Do you know what climate change means? Do you know that the carbon tax does not exist in Quebec?

147 words

The Deputy Speaker

Jun/13/24 4:35:42 p.m.
Watch

I would remind the member that she must address her comments to the Chair. The hon. member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry.

24 words

Mr. Eric Duncan

Jun/13/24 4:35:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, what I find fascinating about the Bloc Québécois member who just spoke is her support of the carbon tax over and over again, when she represents the most northern riding in the province of Quebec. If we look at the chart right now on aviation gasoline and aviation turbo fuel, we see that her own constituents require tens of millions of litres in northern Quebec for medical appointments, for work, for everything, and the government is adding, with zero in rebates for the companies, millions and millions of dollars to the cost of flying back and forth to many remote communities in the member's riding. The member has no problem with jacking up the tax or with zero rebates. She is a Bloc Québécois, separatist MP who loves sending more money to Ottawa and quadrupling the current rates in many cases. Where the Bloc stands or does not stand now I find absolutely fascinating. What does it even stand for anymore? It is certainly not the residents in northern Quebec.

181 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Jun/13/24 4:37:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about how Canadians cannot trust the Liberals, and I will not argue with that of course, but I am wondering how he expects Canadians to trust the Conservatives. The member ran on a price on pollution in the last election. He talks about affordability but voted against dental care, pharmacare and a children's school lunch program. He is the same member who is in a party whose leader refuses to get top security clearance so he can deal with foreign interference. The member talks about how Canadians cannot trust the Liberals. Believe me, I also wonder how they can trust the Liberals, but how on earth can Canadians be expected to trust the Conservatives?

120 words

Trust

Mr. Eric Duncan

Jun/13/24 4:37:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my favourite part of speeches is when the NDP does questions and comments. Here is the thing: New Democrats do not trust the Liberals, but they are going to prop them up for four years and keep them in office. The hypocrisy of what they say makes no sense. If the member is so tough and does not trust the Liberals, and they are doing such wrong, bad, terrible things, they can call the election and let Canadians decide. However, that member will not do that because she knows, like many in her caucus, the response they are getting on the ground for propping the Prime Minister up, even when they do not trust him, and for voting confidence, voting for the budget and voting for these cover-ups that happen at committee and here in the House. I cannot wait for the next election, and neither can millions of Canadians. The NDP is the fourth party, and trust me, it is going to have an even smaller corner after the next election because Canadians do not trust them anymore either.

183 words

The Deputy Speaker

Jun/13/24 4:38:45 p.m.
Watch

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, Correctional Service of Canada; the hon. member for Kelowna—Lake Country, Housing.

50 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara (Vaughan—Woodbridge, Lib.)

Jun/13/24 4:39:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour and a pleasure to rise in the House, this most honourable House, and it is wonderful to see so many of my colleagues here this afternoon. I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, from the beautiful province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are here in the House debating the important issue of climate change, what that means for the environment, for Canada's environment and for the world, as well as what that means for our economy and where our economy is going. On this side of the House, we have made decisions on where the economy should be going and the investments that we need to make. We have made those critical investments in areas such as dental care, pharmacare, and a national early learning and child care program, which, in the province of Ontario, will bring in, on average, $10-a-day day care by September 2025. There is also the national school food program. These are investments that are critical, needed and wanted by the residents in all our ridings. On the dental care side, we have seen that over 200,000 seniors have already gone to visit a dental care provider. On the economic front, there are investment tax credits to continue to build our economy. There are the strategic investments in the auto sector, where we have seen over $50 billion of foreign direct investment come into the Canadian economy for all provinces. There are the investments in Saskatchewan by BHP in potash and Dow Chemical in Alberta. These are multi-billion dollar investments that are powering our economy forward thanks to the know-how of the wonderful residents we get to represent. It is thanks to their generous and entrepreneurial spirits. That is how we confront the issue of climate change. The opposition party members like to bury their heads in the sand and say that climate change does not exist. I wonder what result we would get if we did a poll on the other side and asked them if climate change was a man-made cause. We need to address climate change. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Francesco Sorbara: Mr. Speaker, there we go. We just heard the response from one of the hon. members. Hon. members should know that, when another member has the floor of the House, they should wait their turn. We were taught that at a young age. From east to west, Canada is warming at twice the rate— An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Francesco Sorbara: Mr. Speaker, I hear my hon. colleague from Calgary over there, who will be golfing this summer. I wish him the best on the golf circuit. Canada is warming at a rate twice as fast as the global average, with the north warming three times as fast. The impacts of widespread climate change are already impacting Canadians profoundly, from deadly heat waves to wildfires and flooding, which are all expected to intensify. Last year, the scale of the fires, the smoke, the length of season and the national impacts all contributed to the worst wildfire season Canadians have ever seen. Smoke and ash impacted air quality across North America and beyond. We must take action now to drive down greenhouse gas emissions and make our communities more resilient to the impacts of the changing climate. We can do that while we are economic leaders. In fact, the Canadian economy next year is forecasted to grow at the fastest pace of all G7 countries. As I like to say as an economist, our deficit-to-GDP ratio is among the lowest in the developed world at around 1%, versus the United States, which is between 5% and 6%, and some of the European countries, which range from 3% to 5%. Our debt-to-GDP ratio, on a net basis, which is what we look at and how our AAA credit rating is examined, is again very low. Our unemployment rate is very low. Jobs continue to be created. In fact, our economy continues to perform very strongly. We all have our challenges. The world has its challenges today, and we are responding. Canadians will have a choice in another few months or so. They will have to choose between a narrow-minded, small, less ambitious type of government and a government that has ambitions for its people, has the confidence to invest in its citizens and its industry, and collaborates with labour and industry. Canadians will have to choose between that and a potential government that would bring in an austerity agenda. Let us come clean. It would bring in an austerity agenda. What would that mean for Canadians? It would mean no dental care for seniors. It would mean cutting the Canada child benefit and raising the retirement age back to 67, when we lowered it to 65. What does it mean when the Conservatives say they are going to do something with the budget? That means cuts. In economist terms, there is no other word to use. Austerity equals cuts. When the Leader of the Opposition says he wants small government, that means no ambition and no confidence, whether it is domestic or global. It means an austerity agenda would be brought in front of Canadians, but that is not going to happen. I look at what is going on in the world and, as an economist, I know we need to fight climate change. In fact, our plan is working. Emissions are going down. We are meeting our targets, and we will meet them. We will do that collaborating with governments. I am an MP who represents a wonderful riding in Ontario. It is nice to see, in the province of Ontario, how we are working with the provincial government to make all of these strategic investments in the auto sector. To every auto sector worker in the province of Ontario and across Canada, there is an opposition party that is not supportive of investing in the auto sector. It is not supportive. It does not believe in that. Liberals believe in investing in Canadians. The Conservatives do not. That is what smaller government is. That is what an austerity government is. The Conservatives will need to answer those questions in the coming weeks and months because that is the truth. For climate change, putting a price on carbon is a market-based policy. In fact, nearly every one of those members ran on that in the last election, and now they have changed their minds. The Canadian Climate Institute estimates that, by 2025, Canada could lose $35 billion due to climate change as compared to a more stable climate scenario. This represents 50% of anticipated growth in the gross domestic product for 2025. The cost and impact of inaction on the lives and livelihoods of Canadians is far too great. Taking climate action seriously now is critical to cutting emissions, and making our economy more resilient to climate change and more competitive. Our way forward, for now and for the foreseeable future, is to make the transition to a clean, sustainable future as quickly as possible. We will continue to move forward; we will not go back. That is what I have learned in life, to continue to move forward. We will continue to move forward and build an economy that is more competitive, creates more jobs and creates more wealth, and that is exactly what we are doing. For instance, in 2021, the Government of Canada adopted legislation that committed it to achieving enhanced 2030 emissions reductions of 40% to 45% below 2005 levels under the Paris Agreement, along with a commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. It is not just Canada going this way. Some hon. members like to say that China is building coal plants and stuff, but China right now is installing more renewable power than ever. The United States, under the Inflation Reduction Act, is providing incentives for its clean tech industries and attracting investment. Europe is doing the same thing. We are all going in the same direction because that is the way of the future. We know it. The Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act provides a durable framework of accountability and transparency for Canada's climate action. As an early deliverable under the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, Canada published an emissions reduction plan in 2022. There is nothing stopping the official opposition from putting up a plan. Where is the plan? We need a plan for the economy and the environment that go together. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Francesco Sorbara: Mr. Speaker, I again hear the hon. member from some part of Calgary. This plan is an ambitious and achievable road map that outlines a sector-by-sector path for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change, while strengthening our economy with sustainable jobs and clean, industrial growth. It lays out optimal and the most cost-effective emissions reductions. That is everything from the retooling of our transportation sector with zero-emissions sales targets and EV charging stations, industrial policies on batteries and critical minerals, and historic investments in public transit, including zero-emission buses. As the chair of the auto caucus within the Liberal Party, I have been able to visit a lot of plants and attend the announcement of investments with the Prime Minister and the Premier of Ontario. For the auto sector and the nuclear sector, it is a very exciting time. We are seeing Ontario workers, B.C. workers and Quebec workers, as well as the supply chain across the country, benefiting from these multi-billion dollar, once-in-a-lifetime investments. I am proud to be a part of the government that is leading the charge on this and participating with industry and labour.

1656 words

Quebec

Mr. Tako Van Popta (Langley—Aldergrove, CPC)

Jun/13/24 4:49:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge says that he is concerned about the economic effect of climate change. Well, I can say that so are the one million people who live in the Fraser Valley, who just received news last week that they will be getting zero dollars out of the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund. We are getting just empty words from the Liberal Party about worrying about the economy and climate change. Why is there no money coming to British Columbia to defend, protect and support the port of Vancouver, the biggest port in all of Canada, which was cut off for nine days due to severe flooding in 2021? Where is the money?

118 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

Jun/13/24 4:50:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I know the member for Langley—Aldergrove's area quite well, as a born-and-raised B.C. boy who attended Simon Fraser University in the area. With regard to any funds directed to the Lower Mainland and the Fraser Valley, my heart goes out to all the residents who had to experience the impact of climate change. I believe it was last year, if my memory serves me correctly. Obviously, speaking to the relevant minister, those issues of concern should be raised and so forth. I know the disaster mitigation fund application quite well. The city I live in also applied for it, and I understand the member's concerns. However, we have been there. The Minister of Defence was there, and there have been funds provided to the Lower Mainland and the Fraser Valley to get the roads repaired and those farmers back to doing what they do.

153 words