Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate my esteemed colleague across the way highlighting that I did not, in fact, run on a carbon tax and never would.
One of the things that I think back on was one of those early promises of the Prime Minister that in 2015 his government would become open by default. That was something that everybody could get behind. This seems to be a prime example of an opportunity to be open by default, to request information of it as to the economic and environmental modelling of what emissions would be reduced from the consumer carbon tax.
We've seen delays, and fair enough, because these are complicated matters to hand in, but to be handed a document that says this is made by Environment and Climate Change Canada, but doesn't reflect ECCC, and then just told that this is what our model is, how is that believable?
You're telling me that ECCC doesn't have any better data than four people. They're not even doctors. They're just people. I don't even know who these people are. They put together this paper, and maybe it was hastily put together over the last two weeks. It would be either very worrisome or extremely surprising that there's been no homework done over the last eight years of this carbon tax being developed and put in place.
This is not open by default and also seems to be, as my colleague, Ms. Collins, alluded to, maybe an attempt to hide this. This is why we're continuously asking for more money. Perhaps the motion that has been brought forward is almost too specific, but upon hearing my colleague's motion, I will happily support Ms. Collins' motion, because it's an opportunity to see if the government is truly trying to hide behind this by offering a very clear and open invitation to share both the data and the modelling.
I will support my colleague's motion, but there is clearly something here. I expect better out of ECCC. I expect better out of a government that claimed to be open by default, and also from all parliamentarians of all political stripes.