House of Commons Hansard #288 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was moratorium.
Jim Carr LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the opposition has absolutely no plan. That party had no plan for 10 years because it had absolutely no idea what it means to grow the economy while being respectful of the environment. That party did not respect the environment and it did not grow the economy.
On the question of energy, just last week the CEO of Cenovus said, “I would tell you that the support we have received from the federal government—that support would not have been evident a few years ago.”
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Speaker, for the edification of the minister and all Canadians, between 2005 and 2015, in other words, when we formed the government, greenhouse gas emissions dropped by 2.2%, while real GDP grew by 16.9%. That is the Conservative record: a prosperous economy and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
Meanwhile, this government continues to hide the truth from Canadians regarding the $10-billion dampening effect its measure will have on our economy. How much is it going to cost Canadians?
Why are you continuing the cover-up?
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
I doubt the hon. member was addressing his comments to me. As he knows, when members use the word “you”, they are addressing the Chair. I would therefore remind the hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent to direct his questions through the Chair.
The hon. Minister of Finance.
Bill Morneau LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, we are staying the course to grow our economy. That is very important to Canadians. Our economic growth clearly shows that we are in a great position and that jobs are up across the country.
Our approach is clear: we need a way to ensure economic growth while at the same time protecting the environment for future generations of Canadians.
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, when on the one hand first nations groups are told that no decision has been made in regard to the Kinder Morgan pipeline, and on the other hand and at the same time, a top government official instructs her staff “to give cabinet a legally-sound basis for saying 'yes'” to pipelines, we can safely conclude that first nations were deceived by the government. We can also conclude that the whole process was rigged and that approval of the pipelines was in the cards all along.
Is the minister denying it?
Jim Carr LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, yes. We undertook the most exhaustive consultation on pipelines in Canadian history.
What we actually did was add additional layers of consultation, principally with indigenous communities. The reason we did that was because the Federal Court of Appeal, on the northern gateway case, said that the Harper government failed to consult. The Harper government.
We had a choice: repeat its mistakes or do better. We did better.
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, either the minister is telling the opposite of the truth, or he does not know what is going on in his own department.
Representatives from six organizations were present at a meeting on October 27, 2016, where his assistant deputy minister ordered her staff to give cabinet a legally sound basis for saying yes to Kinder Morgan's proposal. None of these organizations denied that these things were said.
On the contrary, a person who was at the meeting told the National Observer:
“I was rather shocked at being given that direction. It's not something that I would have expected from a Liberal government.”
Is the minister still denying it?
Jim Carr LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, I am not denying the facts. The fact is that our government released extensive materials explaining the basis for its decision-making. By the way, it is all available at www.enercan.ca: the ministerial panel report, the summary of Enercan's online consultations, the crown consultations and accommodation report, Environment and Climate Change Canada's estimate of GHG emissions, summary of NEB recommendations, and the Order in Council approval.
Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Mr. Speaker, there is growing evidence that the government had already approved the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion while it was publicly saying it was consulting with indigenous peoples.
A first nations band in British Columbia has now submitted this evidence to the Federal Court of Appeal and plans to ask the court to order the government to produce all relevant documents.
Will the government fight this out in court, or will it be fully transparent and release the relevant documents?
Jim Carr LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the government consulted with 118 potentially affected indigenous groups. The outcome of these consultations is publicly available.
More than $300 million has been committed to indigenous groups by the proponent under mutual benefit agreements, and $64.7 million for indigenous advisory and environmental monitoring committees, co-developed with first nations for the first time in Canadian history, not to mention that there is a $1.5 billion oceans protection plan.
Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Mr. Speaker, I have negotiated agreements all my life, and memoranda of understanding and letters of understanding are not agreements.
The government continues to insist that no relationship is more important to it than its relationship with indigenous peoples, but it is becoming increasingly clear that that is just eyewash. All the evidence indicates that the government had already made up its mind on Kinder Morgan before holding its phony consultations with indigenous communities.
What is the point of section 35 of the Constitution if the government is acting in bad faith and has no intention of respecting the constitutional rights of indigenous peoples?
Jim Carr LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, these consultations were meaningful, and so were the accommodations that are most important to many indigenous peoples. We understand that the relationship with the air, the water, and the land is fundamental and sacred to indigenous people, a lesson that all of us in Canada are learning day by day. The member should know that these conversations were impactful and meaningful, and so was the accommodation.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, why do we not try a thought experiment to help the government end the carbon tax cover-up? Imagine if I were holding a document right now, and imagine that document promised to explain to the reader how much that carbon tax would cost the average Canadian household. Now imagine that there was whiteout blocking out the numbers on that page, but imagine that a member of the government removed that whiteout. What number would be on that document?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, for years, people have been talking about taking action on climate change. In fact, the Harper government talked about it for a decade and it did virtually nothing. We have taken action. We have put a price on carbon pollution as part of a comprehensive plan to grow the economy in a cleaner way. The Conservatives do not want to take action. They want to go back to the failed Harper Conservative approach of doing nothing to achieve our targets.
Canadians expect and deserve better. They want a plan that will address climate change and will grow our economy, and that is exactly what we are delivering.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, the only thing the government's plan will grow is the bills of average Canadian households. They admit that gasoline prices will go up by at least 11¢ a litre. They admit that the cost of heating one's home will go up by over $200. However, they will not tell us the overall cost to an average Canadian family, because they do not want people to know what this scheme will cost.
I will give the member another chance. How much will this Liberal carbon tax cost the average Canadian household?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, we are putting in place practical, low-cost, effective measures to tackle climate change and to drive clean growth, including the pricing of carbon pollution. It is clear that the Conservatives have no intention of tackling climate change seriously, and no plan to promote clean growth in Canada. That is exactly the kind of inaction we saw for 10 years under Stephen Harper. It is the same party with the same empty words on climate change, and the same indifference for our children's and our grandchildren's future. Canadians expect better. They deserve better. That is what we are going to deliver.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, they talk about clean, green companies. I have one in my riding, SunTech tomatoes. They have greenhouses that produce delicious tomatoes, the “miracles of Manotick” they are called. However, they cost four times as much to produce here as they would in Mexico, which means we ship tomatoes from Mexico to Canadian consumers, emitting greenhouse gases all the way through North America. The higher taxes imposed by Liberal governments contribute to environmental degradation. How much will SunTech have to pay in extra taxes under this scheme?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the environment and the economy, we have a clear choice. We can put the health of our environment and communities at risk, or we can take real action to address climate change and grow the economy. In opposing the practical cost-effective measures we are taking to fight climate change and grow the economy, either the Conservatives do not know what real action is or they do not care.
I have two daughters, and the inaction of the Conservatives is simply not acceptable. Our government is working to ensure that we address climate change in a thoughtful way and drive economic growth, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, what they are going to do is drive business out of the country to other jurisdictions which have lower environmental standards. That is not only bad for the economy and jobs, but bad for the environment itself. Let us get back to the real issue
The government wants Parliament's approval to impose a new tax on Canadian households. How much will it cost the average Canadian family?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, let me a quote a couple of companies on this subject. Teck Resources: “we believe that [carbon pricing] can be one of the most effective ways to incentivize emissions reductions – ensuring sustainable resource development continues to support jobs [and] economic growth..”. Cenovus Energy said that it supports the price on carbon. “Having a price on carbon is one of the fairest and best ways to stimulate innovation to reduce emissions associated with oil.” Imperial Oil: “The most effective policies in our minds would be those that place an economy wide, uniform and predictable [price] on carbon.” Shell Canada: “balancing Canadian economic development while protecting the environment will be enabled by a reasonable price on carbon.”
Thoughtful businesses get it. This is the most appropriate way to drive emissions reductions and promote economic growth.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt that the millionaire and billionaire CEOs he cites are just fine with a few extra thousand dollars in taxes, but it is the working families who cannot afford higher costs who we are championing on this side of the House of Commons. I would note that the very companies he pointed to are divesting themselves from Canada and investing in other places around the world, so, of course, they will not be affected by the taxes that the government supports. When will the Liberals stop siding with the CEOs and start siding with working families?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, let us set the record straight. Eighty per cent of Canadians already live in jurisdictions that have chosen to put a price on carbon pollution, and these four provinces had the best rate of economic growth last year. Our government is taking action by putting a price on carbon pollution to grow the economy in clean ways. For the Harper Conservatives, it was easier to stay silent and do nothing on climate change. They continue to ignore science and the reality unfolding around us with respect to the impact of climate change. In 2015, Canadians asked for a change. Doing nothing on climate like the Harper Conservative government is not acceptable. This government is going to approach it, driving economic growth and improving overall environmental outcomes.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, all the government is improving is its own coffers. Liberals are taking money away from Canadian taxpayers, not only through the direct cost of a carbon tax, but then charging the GST on the carbon tax. We know that this is going to raise the price of the goods that Canadians rely on just to exist, and we know that when those costs go up, those with the least end up paying disproportionately the most.
If the government cannot tell us what an average household will pay, how much will a family living below the poverty line pay in new taxes under this scheme?
Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, for a decade, the Harper Conservatives were ready to risk our future and do nothing on climate change. Today, they still have nothing to propose. They are still gambling with the future of Canadians. That is not the right choice for my children. That is not the right choice for Canada. Canadians asked for a plan. We listened. We have a plan for all Canadians that will address climate change and grow the economy. That is exactly what we are delivering.
Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Trump administration is threatening to revisit its tariffs on our aluminum and steel products this week, but the government is keeping mum. Quebec accounts for most of Canada's primary aluminum production and our communities are worried. Are they doomed to endure another period of uncertainty?
Will the government finally reach a permanent agreement with the U.S. in order to avoid these punitive tariffs?