Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, the action they have taken is forcing Canadians to food banks for the first time in their lives. It is forcing Canadians to turn down thermostats and put food back on the shelf because they cannot afford it. Meanwhile, their environment plan has been revealed to be just a tax plan, because they have fallen four spots in the climate change ranking after raising the carbon tax.

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, that is just false. Their own budget watchdog, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, whom they appointed, testified at committee, saying that “once you factor in the rebate and also the economic impacts...the majority of households will see a negative impact as a result of the carbon tax.”

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, after eight years, it is clear that the NDP-Liberal Prime Minister is not worth the cost. It is not just grocery prices that have skyrocketed in the last year; it is Jamaican vacations too. The tab for the Prime Minister's trip this year came in at over $230,000, an increase of 42%.

Carbon Pricing  He has refused to cancel the hike. Will he at least let Canadians decide for themselves and call a carbon tax election?

Right Hon. Brian Mulroney  Mr. Speaker, it is truly an honour to pay tribute to a great Canadian, a great statesman, a great Conservative and a great man. He was someone who truly lived out his life in service to his fellow Canadians. When I think of Brian Mulroney, I think of a man who led Canada out of a very difficult time.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, my comrade over there from the politburo actually wants to make my speech illegal. If that member's bill passed and I gave the speech I just gave outside of this chamber, I could go to jail, because that is the mentality of the NDP. Its members want to control speech, stifle debate and impose their views.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, it is funny that the hon. member is the one who has to twist, turn and pretzel. We have to hold up the rebate in just the right light, maybe on the second full moon of the month, and if we have it at the right angle, we might find where someone is better off. This is not my opinion.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, that is not the case at all. We heard the pleas from Canadians who are suffering because of this punitive tax. We know Canadians are opposed to the carbon tax, especially the hike in the carbon tax, and it is not just public polling that shows that. Seventy per cent of premiers have urged the government to, at the very least, not hike the tax that is coming on April 1.

Business of Supply  moved: That, given that 70% of provinces and 70% of Canadians oppose the Prime Minister's 23% carbon tax hike on April 1, the House call on the NDP-Liberal coalition to immediately cancel this hike. Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the NDP-Liberal Prime Minister is not worth the cost.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, given what you have just said, and after having some discussion among members of various parties, I am sure there will be agreement to allow members to do their due diligence. If we are going to take this seriously, if we are going to show Canadians and the world that foreign policy is not done on the back of a napkin with two negotiators and without any kind of consultation, I ask for unanimous consent to defer the vote until tomorrow.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, you just literally referenced the point that my colleague from Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman and I made about when the amendment is so different. The original motion would call for a unilateral recognition; the revised motion would call for a negotiated one. Those are two diametrically opposed aspects of the motion.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I understand that, in the moment, you might have made a ruling. It is common for Chair occupants to do this, before necessarily hearing arguments, when it is expected to be of a routine nature. However, as many Chair occupants have had to deal with in the past, when parties raise substantive objections after an initial ruling, the Speaker can go back and take a look at it in light of the objections raised.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to expenditures incurred by the government related to the Prime Minister’s trip to Jamaica which began on or around December 26, 2023: (a) what are the expenditures to date, including those incurred by the Privy Council Office, the RCMP, and any other department or agency that was involved in the trip, including any advance work done to prepare for the trip, in total and broken down by type of expense (e.g. accommodation, fuel, per diems, etc.); (b) what was the total amount of expenditures incurred for accommodations at (i) Prospect Estate and Villas, (ii) other hotels or properties, broken down by vendor; (c) for each expenditure in (b), what was the (i) number of rooms rented at each resort, (ii) number of nights stayed, (iii) nightly rate; (d) what are the details of the legs of each challenger flight that travelled between Canada and Jamaica in relation to the trip, including, for each leg, the (i) date, (ii) origin, (iii) destination, (iv) names and titles of passengers, excluding security personnel, (v) amount of fuel used, (vi) fuel cost, (vii) catering cost, (viii) other costs, broken down by type; (e) what are the details of the problem or malfunction that occurred with the initial Challenger jet that causes a second Challenger jet to be flown to Jamaica; and (f) how much did it cost to fix the problem or malfunction in (e)?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to the government's participation in the UN Climate Change Conference, the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) in Dubai: (a) how many and which individuals were part of the Canadian delegation that travelled to Dubai; (b) what were the titles of all individuals in (a); (c) were there any delegation members in (a) for which the government did not pay the expenses of, and, if so, which members; (d) what are the names and titles of all other individuals who attended the COP28 for whom the government paid expenses; (e) what are the total expenditures incurred by the government to date related to the conference, broken down by type; (f) what is the government's estimate of the carbon footprint resulting from the Canadian delegation's travel to and from the conference; and (g) for the delegations accommodations in Dubai, (i) what hotels were used, (ii) how much was spent at each hotel, (iii) how many rooms were rented at each hotel and for how many nights, (iv) what was the room rate, or range of room rates, paid at each hotel?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to government subsidies to Qualified Canadian Journalism Organizations (QCJO): (a) what is the total amount of subsidies paid to QCJOs in total, broken down by year for each of the last five years; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by type of tax credit or subsidy; (c) how many organizations have applied for the QCJO designation; (d) of the applications in (c), how many were (i) approved, (ii) rejected; (e) how many QCJOs received subsidies, broken down by year for each of the last five years; and (f) without identifying the organization, what is the breakdown of (e) by subsidy range for each type of subsidy (i.e. under $100,000, $100,001-$500,000, etc.)?