Debates of April 9th, 2024

Finance

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. Inflation is at 2.8%, down for two months in a row below 3%. We have a AAA credit rating, and just in the last nine months, a food program for students in school. We are going to make sure that there are homes built across the country.

How did that member and his Ontario colleagues vote when it came to the plant in St. Thomas? How did they vote when it came to the Ford plant? They voted against. We are here for Canadians. That is what they expect. We are going to do that each and every day.

Telecommunications

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we know that folks need to be connected, especially in rural, remote and indigenous communities in Alberta. It allows access to education, jobs, health care services and innovation that otherwise would be unreachable.

Unfortunately, for 10 years, the Conservatives failed to prioritize investments in connectivity. Because of their lack of action, communities in my province have been left out of those opportunities. The good news is that our government is tackling this issue head-on.

Could the government tell us what progress has been made toward connecting Albertans to affordable quality—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

The hon. minister.

[Gudie Hutchings, Liberal, Minister of Rural Economic Development and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, since 2015, we have been making investments in Alberta so that Albertans can access the tools of the 21st century. Today, just under 90% of Albertans have access to high-speed Internet.

In March, I was there to announce 14 projects to connect over 22,000 homes, 3,400 indigenous homes, all in rural Alberta. This $112-million investment is in partnership with the province as part of our commitment to connect all Canadians by 2030.

We will always stick up for Albertans. My colleague, the MP for Calgary Skyview, always sticks up for Albertans and his constituents too.

Climate Change

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are experiencing the brunt of the climate crisis, with damage caused by flooding and the fear of wildfire evacuations, all while the Liberals are rewarding the very people who are getting rich off of it.

The Liberals gave over $18 billion to rich oil and gas companies last year, and, today, we found out that they broke $15 billion in climate promises. They announced $15 billion just for the photo ops.

Why is it that the Liberals have no problem rewarding Canada's biggest polluters, but they will not invest in our children's futures?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague knows, I was an environmental activist for many years. In those years, we could only dream of a federal government that would invest tens of billions of dollars in the transition to fight climate change, to create the jobs and the economy of the 21st century.

We have committed more than $100 billion since 2015 in the fight against climate change. That is not double what had been done before. That is not four times more than what had been done before. That is not 10 times more. It is 20 times more. It has never been done before in Canada in terms of investment to fight climate change and create opportunities for the 21st century.

The Environment

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, many Canadians were let down when the Liberals suddenly ended the greener homes program. Yesterday, we learned that over a billion dollars promised for the program went unspent.

Meanwhile, across Canada, hundreds of people built their careers and businesses on providing service as a part of the greener homes program. They were urged to do that by the government. Now they feel like the rug has been pulled out from under them. Some of them are selling their equipment.

Why has the minister left these important clean energy workers in limbo?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the discussion that he and I had at the airport on this subject. I think we were intending to meet more about this going forward.

The greener homes program was, indeed, very successful. We actually utilized all the funding early. Thus, we have closed the portal. However, we have also announced that we will be moving forward with a new program that will be focused on folks who live on modest incomes, enabling them to make deep retrofits moving forward to reduce carbon emissions and to enhance their energy savings on an ongoing basis. We are very much committed to putting that in force.

Government Responses to Order Paper Questions

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I would like to take a moment to make a statement concerning the question of privilege raised by the member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola. Yesterday, on April 8, 2024, the member raised concerns on the government responses to Order Paper questions. As indicated by the member is his comments, I signed these responses when I was the parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister. So that no conflict of interest may be perceived, I will recuse myself from this matter and I will not comment further on this. I have requested that the Deputy Speaker rule on the question of privilege. He will therefore return with a ruling in a timely manner.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the question of privilege raised by the member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola.

The question of privilege concerns a clear and potentially intentional omission of facts from a recently answered Order Paper question known as Question No. 1445. It would appear the government has acted irresponsibly and violated parliamentary procedure, therefore breaching trust.

In a question I sent to the government, I asked the Prime Minister's Office to outline when the government asked social media to take down content. This is commonly referred to as censorship. The government sent me an answer on the many times it had done this, but apparently this was only partially true, because there were omissions made.

On Friday, April 5, Allen Sutherland, an assistant secretary to the cabinet in the Privy Council Office, testified at the public inquiry on foreign interference. During his testimony, Mr. Sutherland revealed that in 2019 the Privy Council Office had asked Facebook to take down a post about the Prime Minister from the Buffalo Chronicle. He also mentioned that Facebook had honoured the request, leading to the removal of the content from the platform.

This is why I add to the question of privilege. This request for a takedown was not reported in the answer to the question I sent to the government, which means that there was clearly an omission made. I asked the government to report on its content takedown requests from 2016 onward, and I listed Facebook as one of the platforms I wanted to know about.

There was a clear omission from my Order Paper question and the answer I received, which has failed to satisfy its purpose in providing the truth based on what I had asked. This is a major concern, and it undermines trust in the institution in which electors place their confidence. How can we operate as a parliamentary democracy if the government cannot be trusted to answer questions from the official opposition, especially on matters of censorship?

Mr. Speaker, it is awfully loud in here. I have put up with it for quite some time, but perhaps you could bring that down.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I would invite all members who wish to carry on conversations to do so outside the chamber.

I invite the hon. member for Lethbridge to continue her remarks.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I support this question of privilege in light of the violation of government's obligation to answer an Order Paper question, but I also add to it, considering how the government has taken steps to take control of the Internet in Canada.

It has done this through legislation like Bill C-11, which centralizes regulatory control of what Canadians can see, hear and post online based on what the government deems “Canadian”.

In addition, I highlight Bill C-18, which has resulted in the government being one of the biggest gatekeepers of news in Canada. This is a major conflict of interest and a direct attack on journalistic integrity in this country.

Now, most recently, through Bill C-63, the government proposes to establish an entire commission, yet another arm of the government, that would regulate online harm.

How can Canadians trust the government to police various aspects of the Internet if it cannot even be honest and tell the truth about the content requested to be taken down? Trust is pinnacle and frankly the government has not earned any of it. The truth must prevail.

Mr. Speaker, you have the opportunity to look into this and to get to the bottom of it, or you can keep us in the dark and allow secrecy and injustice to reign. I understand that you are the one to make this decision, and we are putting our trust in you to make sure that this place is upheld and democracy is kept strong.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I thank the member for Lethbridge for her comments on this matter.

Her question of privilege is very similar to the question of privilege raised by the member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola. As I said in my statement, since I was the parliamentary secretary who signed that answer to the Order Paper questions, I will let the Deputy Speaker make the ruling. I am recusing myself from the discussion on this subject.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency Meeting

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is disturbing that Parliament must vote for a meeting between the Prime Minister and the premiers, but we have no choice, because the Prime Minister refuses to listen.

What happened to the sunny ways and openness that this Prime Minister once preached?

It is very easy to see why Canadian premiers have lost their trust in the Prime Minister over his failed carbon tax, because he has continued to mislead them for eight years. Before 2019, the Prime Minister's former environment minister promised Canadians not to raise the carbon tax over $50 a tonne. After the election, the Prime Minister announced his plan to quadruple the carbon tax. In fact, the current environment minister is now refusing to rule out any further carbon tax hikes. I asked the environment minister if he could promise Canadians to not raise his carbon tax over $170 a tonne. He refused to answer. I wonder why.

The Prime Minister also told Canadians they would get more back than they paid in carbon tax, but the government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer proved that wrong. In fact, the majority of Canadians will pay more in carbon tax than they get back. It is no wonder the premiers across Canada have lost trust in this government's carbon tax scam. It is no wonder they are demanding a meeting with the Prime Minister.

It sure does not help when his environment minister punishes Canadians for driving their cars and heating their homes as he jets around the globe lecturing others. The hypocrisy is truly astounding, and Canadian premiers are right to call this government out.

In conclusion, the great Winston Churchill once said, “For a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”

He was right. Now the Prime Minister and his radical environment minister believe they can carbon tax Canada into environmental prosperity, a belief so foolish that in doing so they have united Canadians in opposition to their carbon tax.

This is not the unity that a Prime Minister is supposed to create. A Prime Minister is supposed to unite a country by lifting it up, not tearing it down.

However, a newfound unity does bring hope to Canadians, for the days of this NDP-Liberal government are coming to an end, and Canadians will soon get to elect a common-sense Conservative government that will axe the carbon tax for everyone, for good.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, throughout the debate on opposition days, and we have had many opposition days on the very same issue, one of the things that remain constant is the fact that the Conservative Party of Canada continues to want to mislead Canadians on the important issue of a price on pollution.

I am wondering if the member could be very clear in his indications and indicate that when they say they are cutting the tax, they are also talking about cutting the rebate, by which 80% of Manitobans receive more money back than they actually pay in the tax, and which has given a very encouraging climate incentive for reducing fossil fuel use.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that this government is planning to quadruple the carbon tax. That is four times, quadruple.

Right now, I have lots of homeowners forwarding their natural gas bills, $100 gas bills that have 100 dollars' worth of carbon tax on them right now. The Liberals want to quadruple that.

His natural gas bill, his energy bill, is going to go up to $500 when it is all said and done, thanks to this government.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there certainly is an affordability crisis in this country, in large part caused by oil and gas companies across the country that are gouging Canadians at the pumps. While the carbon tax went up just over 3¢ a litre last year, and rebates went up with it, the profits, pure profits, of the oil and gas industry went up 18¢ a litre, to just over 42¢ or so, yet there is no mention of that in this motion.

Does the member have any explanation for why that is the case?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Mr. Speaker, speaking of profits, we simply have to do the math. This government is promising to quadruple the carbon tax. If we take my example of $100 in natural gas costs and $100, right now, of carbon tax, and quadruple that, there is a massive amount of profit by this government right now, not by oil and gas companies.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this motion before us raises an interesting idea. I am certainly one for discussion and dialogue, especially at times when we differ across the country, so I appreciate it being brought forward.

My question is for my hon. friend down the way. In question period today, one of his colleagues got up and claimed that the carbon tax was 23%. That kind of statement, which is patently false, really clouds Canadians' understanding of the issue that is before us.

Could the member share whether he agrees that we should be accurate when we are citing numbers and percentages, so that we are not misinforming the people we represent?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Mr. Speaker, actually, the carbon tax went up by 23% on April 1.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to this opposition day motion. It feels like Groundhog Day once again—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

The member for Kingston and the Islands probably did not hear me, but I was calling for questions and comments.

The hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, as a farmer himself, as I am, could the member talk about how this carbon tax increase is impacting the cost of production for farmers right across this country, how that leads to higher costs for people who have to buy food, and why we are seeing more and more people in lineups at food banks and soup kitchens across the country, as well as about the issue of unaffordability that has been created by the Liberal-NDP carbon tax coalition?

Could the member also reflect on the fact that the Prime Minister refuses to meet with the premiers to find a better solution that does not negatively impact Canadians from coast to coast to coast?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Mr. Speaker, that is a very important question.

The introduction of the carbon tax and the evolvement of it over the last eight years have fundamentally changed rural Canada, how we do business and how we think about making money. Agriculture, being an energy-intensive industry, is being impacted the most, by far. Nowhere has the Liberal government even tried to address that.

That is why we are bringing forward this motion today.