Environment Committee on Oct. 31st, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I have Mr. Deltell, followed by Mr. Kram and Mr. Leslie.

Mr. van Koeverden, do you want to speak to this? Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't see your hand. I apologize for that.

Go ahead, Monsieur Deltell.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Rarely has an announcement by a prime minister been so booed by virtually everybody, starting with the former Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, Catherine McKenna, a former member from the Ottawa region and a leading figure in the first wave of this government. She's also identified as the architect of the Liberal carbon tax. We don't share her point of view, but we recognize her as the architect of carbon pricing.

Barely a few hours after the Prime Minister's surprising announcement, Ms. McKenna expressed her regret, sincere regret from someone who believes in the principle of carbon pricing. She believes that imposing a tax on carbon in order to take money out of taxpayers' pockets is a good thing. We don't share that belief. However, she is indeed the architect of the policy that has been implemented by the current Prime Minister.

What did we see last Thursday? A Prime Minister who, after preaching to the entire world for eight years about the importance of carbon pricing, decided to flip-flop and lower the carbon tax for a portion of the population because he was taking a real hit in the polls. We can see the result of that today.

As we say back home, when you're two-faced, you've got four cheeks for slapping. That's why the ecologists, provincial premiers and Canadians are angry. That's the reality.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I'd like to correct the record. The carbon levy on home heating oil has been applied across the country, not just in Atlantic Canada, as stated by the member.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Deltell, the floor is yours.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I presume this is why the Premier of Saskatchewan said they will not collect the carbon tax anymore. It's because this is totally unacceptable and it is focused only on the maritime people. It's not me who said that. It's the Prime Minister, at the press conference, who showed it very clearly.

On Thursday afternoon, the Prime Minister of Canada held a press conference instead of attending question period. Whom did we see at that press conference? Only Liberal members from the Maritimes. Where were the people from Ontario? Where were the people from Quebec? Where were the people from Manitoba? Where were the people from Saskatchewan?. No, it's true: there are no Liberals in Saskatchewan. Where were the other Liberal members and ministers?

They're missing in action, Mr. Chair.

They weren't there, and for good reason. It didn't concern them.

The truth is that this makeshift policy is based solely on the fact that the Prime Minister is taking a hit in the polls.

I have a lot of respect and esteem for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. As we say back home, he steps up to the plate. He appeared at oral question period on Friday morning and answered questions. He also appeared on the program Les coulisses du pouvoir, where he very politely said there would be no more changes like that one as long as he was minister. Indirectly, he was saying that, if the Prime Minister does it again, he will resign.

I repeat: I very much respect the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change on a personal level. He's also a tough adversary. Personally, I like tough adversaries because they encourage you to do your best.

Our understanding is that he stepped up to the plate to defend a position I believe he didn't really support, but I don't want to presume. He didn't support the idea of permitting the Bay du Nord project either, even though it was the right thing to do for the good of the country. The minister even uttered a veiled threat that he would resign if the Prime Minister did it again.

On the one hand, the architect of this tax policy, an environmental policy, who established and introduced the Liberal carbon tax, isn't happy, and, on the other, the current minister, who's required to implement that policy and, more particularly, forced to implement the reversal announced by the Prime Minister, isn't happy either. Neither one is happy, and rightly so.

We've also heard a great hue and cry from duly elected provincial authorities, who would have liked the whole thing to be cancelled, if possible. That's what we'd like too. At least if we're talking about winter heating, all types of heating should be included. However, the Prime Minister made his decisions based on his partisan political intentions. That isn't how a prime minister should act, particularly with regard to one of his commitments, one of his key policies.

You should've heard all the comments on the weekend from people who don't hate the current prime minister and who acknowledge that the two basic focuses of his approach for the past eight years have been the First Nations and carbon pricing. Now, in a dramatic turn of events, he retreats from carbon pricing. Need I note that he's doing so after insulting everyone who didn't agree with them, starting with the Conservatives? And now he flip-flops because he's taking a hit in the polls.

That's why we're saying that, if the carbon tax is hitting Canadians hard in one part of the country, it's hitting all Canadians across the country, and in every way.

A year ago, more precisely on October 20, 2022, we of the official opposition conducted a one-day debate in the House of Commons on winter residential heating in Canada. We thought—I think it was entirely logical, and thePrime Minister showed last week that we're partly right—that it wasn't a good idea to create and impose a new carbon tax on residential heating in the middle of winter. Who voted against that motion a year ago? The party in power, the Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Green Party voted against the motion. In short, we Conservatives were the only ones who thought it wasn't a good idea to impose a new tax on residential heating in Canada in the middle of winter. It was sheer common sense.

The Prime Minister, flanked by members from only one region of Canada, made a makeshift announcement for partisan political purposes. However, as Prime Minister, he speaks on behalf of all Canadians. He managed to sew division among ecologists, provincial political authorities and ordinary Canadians alike but failed to please all Canadians, including Quebeckers, of course, who are paying a heavy price.

For all these reasons, we would like to continue debating the motion. We would also like the Prime Minister to be accountable in this matter. We're talking about home heating; it makes no sense to tax Canadians in the middle of winter.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Kram. The floor is yours.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

For four years now, I have heard over and over again in my riding that the carbon tax has been making life less and less affordable for people, particularly when it comes to the cost of home heating. I was very surprised at the announcement last week that the Liberal government was going to pause the carbon tax on home heating, but only for home heating oil and not for natural gas.

Why would that be? Well, with a little bit of research, one can see that in Saskatchewan, all of the home heating is done with natural gas, whereas in the Atlantic provinces it is primarily done with oil.

I think that certainly raises some questions about why that decision was made. I think the Liberals rural economic development minister, Gudie Hutchings, explained it very clearly this weekend when she said that the Prairies do not elect enough Liberals and, therefore, her government was not going to listen to the people of that region. It really is shameful that affordability and the cost of living are not a concern to this Liberal government when it comes to the people of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, simply because of the way they voted in the last election.

I think the level of divisiveness this government has stooped to is shameful. I fully support the motion by my colleague, Dan Mazier.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Kram.

Mr. Leslie.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I agree. It's a motion worthy of support. I find it interesting that the tax began as revenue-neutral, and then you were getting more back, and now it's being recognized that it is punishing Canadians and needs to be paused—at least until there's an election where the Liberals can try to regain power and reimplement and quadruple the carbon tax. When the polling is down, the Prime Minister scrambles to come up with.... Perhaps if had been able to ask my question earlier, we could have found out that this was driven by departmental officials, but it seems a lot more like a political decision made when polling numbers are down.

It's so typical of this Prime Minister and his need to try to divide Canadians. My colleague across the way points out that the heating oil exemption applies across Canada. That's great—only that 97% of people don't use heating oil. We've picked and chosen in an area in which there are a bunch of Liberal MPs, where polling numbers are down, and we should provide some relief to them. What about my constituents? What about people across the country who are sick and tired of paying a carbon tax?

I know that my colleagues haven't knocked on doors as recently as I have, but I will give you fair warning that in the next election you will find that people despise the carbon tax; that people are hurting; and that people, businesses and families are struggling to get by. They know this is a tax plan, not an environmental plan.

They'll realize that—

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, we have Ms. Taylor Roy.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

I'm sorry. Can we correct a statement, or can we question a statement made here? How can the member say he knows that we have not been knocking on doors as recently as he has?

I'd like to know how you know that, Mr. Leslie.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I was in a byelection more recently than your federal election.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Order, please.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

I knock on doors regularly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Order, please.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

That's good, although I'm surprised that you're not more aware.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

A point of order has to be related to the rules. It can't be used to counter statements, however false or unproven they may be.

I'll let you continue, Mr. Leslie.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chair, can I ask a question, then?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

How do we do that? How do we counter a false statement or narrative that's being put out?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

When you get the floor....

Do you want to be on the list?

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

No, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay.

Mr. Leslie.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was very pleasantly surprised that the Prime Minister did recognize the pain that his carbon tax is imposing on Canadians, that he climbed down from his high horse at least long enough to pause it for certain Canadians. I hope he will come to his senses, as prairie leaders, premiers and political leaders across this country are highlighting that it is unfair. It divides Canadians. It's time to scrap the carbon tax—both the first and second—in its entirety, and passing this motion is a good place to start.