House of Commons Hansard #315 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was pricing.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

June 14th, 2018 / 1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Madam Speaker, I will take a moment to explain these two components in further detail.

Part 1 of the act sets out the details on the fuel charge, which would generally be payable by a fuel distributor or a fuel producer who can be expected to pass on that cost to the end-user of the fuel in the form of an increased purchase price, thereby creating a price signal throughout the Canadian economy. The rates of the fuel charge are set out in schedule 2 of the act. This part will be administered by the Canada Revenue Agency.

Part 2 establishes the performance-based system for industrial facilities with high emissions that are also trade exposed. This system is designed to provide a price signal and incent reductions while minimizing competitiveness in carbon leakage risks. Instead of paying the fuel charge in part 1 on fuels that they purchase, industrial facilities will face a compliance cost on only a portion of their emissions, the amount by which they exceed a regulated limit.

The annual emissions limit for a facility that carries out a regulated activity will be based on an emissions intensity standard for that activity. Standards will generally be in the form of emissions per unit of production. Regulations will set different standards for different activities.

As an example of how this will work, a standard could be set at one tonne of CO2 emissions per unit of production for a particular regulated activity. A facility that carries out the regulated activity would have an annual limit that is equal to one tonne of carbon emissions multiplied by the number of units that the facility produces in that year. This will create an incentive for facilities to produce as efficiently as possible, in other words, to reduce their emissions per unit of production. This will drive energy efficiency and switching to cleaner fuels.

If a facility emits less than the limit, it will receive surplus credits that it can bank for future use or sell to other regulated firms. The system thus creates an incentive for continuous improvement.

Facilities that emit above their limit will need to provide compensation for the portion of their emissions above their annual limit using one of three methods. First, facilities can submit surplus credits that they earned in previous years or acquired from another facility. Second, facilities can submit offset credits from projects that prevent emissions or that remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Third, facilities can pay a charge equivalent to the price of the federal standard carbon price. This price is set at $10 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2018 and will rise by $10 annually until it reaches $50 per tonne in 2022.

Facilities will be required to open accounts in a tracking system to buy, sell, and use credits. The tracking system in part 2 will also register payments of the excess emissions charge. The actual performance standards for each sector will be prescribed in regulations. Officials from the Department of Environment and Climate Change are in the process of engaging with industry and other interested stakeholders on the development of these standards.

Wherever the federal carbon pricing system applies, the Government of Canada will return all direct revenue made from the carbon price to the jurisdiction of origin.

Part 1 and part 2 each contain administrative sections, such as provisions on registration, compliance reporting, confidentiality of information, and record-keeping for the proper functioning of the federal system. To ensure timely payment of the carbon price and compliance with the other requirements of the federal system, part 1 and part 2 each contain enforcement provisions, including penalties, offences, and debt collection provisions tailored to the specific component in each part.

The act requires the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to report annually to Parliament on the administration of the act. This is in addition to the commitment in the pan-Canadian framework for annual reports on the overall implementation of the framework and a joint federal-provincial-territorial review of the overall approach to pricing carbon in Canada by early 2022 to confirm the path forward, with an interim review in 2020.

Pricing carbon pollution is one of the key actions that will put Canada on a course to meet our 2030 emissions reduction target, but it is not the only action. Canada's clean growth and climate action plan includes many other measures across the economy that complement carbon pricing to cut emissions. These include phasing out coal-fired power; improving the energy efficiency of buildings, vehicles, and industries; and cutting methane emissions from the oil and gas sector.

The government is also making significant investments to enable Canadian businesses and workers to participate in the trillion-dollar opportunities offered by the world's transition to a clean growth economy. In June 2017, the $1.4 billion low-carbon economy leadership fund was launched to support provincial and territorial projects for buildings, industry, forestry, and agriculture.

In December 2017, the first set of projects was announced and many are now under way. On March 14, 2018, the low-carbon economy challenge was launched. The challenge will provide up to $500 million for projects that generate clean growth and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Provinces, territories, businesses, municipalities, not-for-profit organizations, and indigenous communities can apply. The government is also investing billions of dollars in green infrastructure and public transit. The Canada Infrastructure Bank and Export Development Canada are using innovative financing mechanisms, like green bonds, to support climate investments and help new technologies become mainstream.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to thank you for allowing me to rise on the point of order earlier. I did want to give the member an opportunity to correct the record because he did refer to it as a carbon tax and I certainly would not want Gerry to be mad at him for not referring to it as carbon pricing.

However, the member did speak about direct revenues. Forgive me for being skeptical about having direct revenues go back to the provinces, but it is on the issue of the GST, which is critical. Effectively what the carbon tax plan proposes is that the Liberals continue to charge the GST on the price of the carbon tax, in other words, creating a tax on top of a tax.

Will the Liberal Party keep this money as a means and a way to spend more money? They are going to be collecting more taxes. Are they going to be spending more?

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Madam Speaker, we try to deflect from the real issues we are trying to deal with here and that is how we meet our 2030 climate change targets. I am not surprised that members opposite would try to focus on measures that would be fearmongering rather than trying to deal with the real issue.

The question becomes, what are we going to tell our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren? Are we going to say, “We had really good intentions of meeting our goals and we really should have probably paid the cost of the pollution we were creating, but the Americans were not, so why should we? Actually I think we would rather let you guys pay for it in the future”?

That is not good enough for this side of the House. We have a plan, unlike the Conservatives, to actually deal with the crisis that faces our society and I am proud of the plan that we have put forward.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Madam Speaker, something stinks. In 2017, the Prime Minister was awarded the global energy and environment leadership award by the world's largest oil companies. I think that is a clear sign that the government is putting oil extraction ahead of the environment. I would like to know when that will stop.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Madam Speaker, on this side of the House we are focused on actually dealing with the long-term goals that we have set as a government and that is that the economy and the environment have to go hand in hand. We cannot say it is all going to be the economy and we cannot say it is all going to be the environment because that is not going to suit the long-term needs of Canadians. If we blow up the economy so that we can deal with our emissions today, then that is not going to serve the interests of Canadians in the long run.

We have a plan. It is a multi-faceted plan that takes into consideration investments in public transit, innovation, water and sewer. It is trying to minimize our emissions while at the same time making strategic investments that are going to grow our economy to the benefit of all Canadians, and creating great jobs. As has been pointed out many times, this government has created over 600,000 jobs since being elected and has the highest growth in the G7. I think we have the right balance with our plan.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Madam Speaker, obviously, this national carbon tax is going to be imposed on places like Saskatchewan and Nunavut. In Nunavut, 80% of the diesel that is used to generate heat for housing is paid for by the government. The Premier of Nunavut has said that this plan will not work.

Saskatchewan has its own plan to make its own climate goals that are dedicated toward the Paris Agreement. Why does the member think he should be telling Saskatchewan how it should be dealing with climate change?

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Madam Speaker, we came out with a pan-Canadian framework that all provinces agreed to. Eighty per cent of Canadians, right now, have a price on carbon that is at a certain level. We feel that all Canadians should have the same price on carbon. We are all polluting, and we should pay for that pollution today and not put that burden on future generations. I think that for any Canadian in this country, the basis of our being is that we believe in fairness. We believe in justice. We believe in paying our fair share for the pollution we are creating today, for the benefit of future generations. You talk about debt going on to future generations. This is a massive debt that you are trying to throw to future generations. That is why I am so surprised the Conservatives are taking the position they are on this issue.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I am not throwing anything at anybody. I want to remind the member that he is to address any questions and comments to the Chair.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Peace River—Westlock.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to this opposition motion. This motion is about transparency, but it is also about the lack of clarity by the government on this carbon tax.

I want to talk a bit about how the carbon tax affects my riding of Peace River—Westlock in northern Alberta. Northern Alberta is a pretty cold place. There are about five days a year over 30°C and the rest of the year is much colder than that. There is about a four-month growing season and beyond that, it is winter, still winter, and almost winter. Those are three seasons in northern Alberta.

When it comes to what the carbon tax costs average Canadian families, my region will be affected more than others because furnaces there run more than anywhere else in the country. In Alberta, natural gas has gone up by one-quarter of the price. It was $3 a gigajoule before and now it is $4 a gigajoule. That translates to hundreds of dollars more every month for heat in northern Alberta, and that is the direct cost to families in heat alone.

The gentleman who spoke before me talked about how the carbon tax would be a direct cost of $500 per family. That is the direct cost, just on heating bills. In northern Alberta, the carbon tax is much more than $500 per family, but maybe that is the average for all of Canada. That seems fair as a direct cost. We do not know, however, because the government has redacted the entire document that the finance department created for this new initiative for a carbon tax in Canada.

It is the other things that trickle down that have a detrimental effect not only on individual Canadian families but our entire economy. The thing about the carbon tax is that it will be put on heating and transportation. Then and there, that makes everything more expensive.

The government runs around and says that it stands up for supply management and the steel industry in Canada, yet it does not seem to realize that a carbon tax will affect all of these communities and industries significantly.

Before I go any further, I forgot to mention that I would love to share my time with the member for Barrie—Innisfil.

I was recently in Sault Ste. Marie. The carbon tax there is a significant competitive disadvantage for the steel industry. The natural gas that goes to Sault Ste. Marie to heat the steel comes from western Canada. It is imperative that the steel industry in Sault Ste. Marie is viable because a huge amount of natural gas from western Canada is sold to Sault Ste. Marie to heat the steel that is used in northern Alberta to drill in the oil patch and produce energy for the entire world.

The cost of the carbon tax is then translated throughout the economy on percentages. Doing business is all about margins and people calculate the margins based on their costs. When the costs increase, margins increase because it is typically a percentage of the cost. When suppliers to particular industries have the increased cost of the carbon tax, they will all increase their rates. We have seen this in Alberta with the trucking companies. When the carbon tax came in, some companies increased their rates by 8%, other companies just added a fuel surcharge, and others added the carbon tax in their basic rates. Shipping to my area is 8% more expensive.

Garbage collection in the town of Falher went up 8%. The town had to redo its budget because the garbage collection company said that the quote it submitted was no longer good because it had to pay the carbon tax. The Town of Whitecourt said that just heating its publicly owned buildings was going to cost $100,000 more a year, just in heat alone. That is exactly why we need—

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

One moment please, there is a point of order. The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Draft Appropriation Bill—Main Estimates, 2018-19Points of OrderGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I apologize to my friend across the way, but it is a point of order that I need to get on the record right away.

I rise to respond to the point of order raised earlier today by my hon. colleague, the member for Edmonton West, in regard to the language of the draft appropriation bill and vote 40. I would like to draw your attention, Madam Speaker, to Standing Order 81(21), which reads as follows:

The adoption of any motion to concur in any estimate or estimates shall be an Order of the House to bring in a bill or bills based thereon.

I want to emphasize the words, “bills based thereon”. Similar language is also found in Standing Order 83(4). It states:

The adoption of any Ways and Means motion shall be an order to bring in a bill or bills based on the provisions of any such motion or to propose an amendment or amendments to a bill then before the House, provided that such amendment or amendments are otherwise admissible.

I would reiterate, “a bill or bills based on the provisions of any such motion”. This bill is entirely based on the estimates and entirely consistent with our long-standing tradition of financial procedure in this place. Therefore, we believe it to be in proper form. I look forward to your ruling, Madam Speaker.

Draft Appropriation Bill—Main Estimates, 2018-19Points of OrderGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I appreciate the additional information that the parliamentary secretary has provided. We will certainly take it under advisement as we deliberate on the previous information that was received.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Madam Speaker, I understand why the Liberals would want to interrupt my great speech. I was telling them exactly how this carbon tax was affecting my northern Alberta communities.

This carbon tax will cost Canadians exponentially, as I was explaining earlier, particularly around the trucking costs. Up in northern Alberta, bringing food in is a significant cost, often because the food will sit on the truck for eight or nine hours.

That says nothing about what the carbon tax will cost our farmers. One of the major inputs to our farmers is both the fuel and the fertilizer. Both of these things will have significant amounts of carbon tax on them. This will make it so our food is more expensive.

I do not know if members know this, but all our food is grown by farmers across Canada. It is important that our farmers maintain viability. When a carbon tax is put on our farmers, they are placed at a competitive disadvantage with farmers around the world. We are already at somewhat of a competitive disadvantage just given the location in which we live. It is a cold climate and not as many things grow in northern Alberta as in some of the other places in the world. However, we have a thriving agriculture sector, yet the Liberals are imposing a carbon tax on farmers and, at the same time, saying they stand up for farmers.

One of the huge costs to farming is the fuel, and we see a significant increase in the fuel costs, never mind the heating. When the crops come off the field and are a bit too wet, we have to dry them out, and that uses a lot of natural gas and propane. If we increase the cost of natural gas by a complete quarter, 25%, that is a huge cost that will be borne out by our farmers. They say that the farmers might be able to manage this, that they might be able to remain viable. Sure, they will probably increase the price of their product, but what does is make food across the country more expensive.

If the Liberals were actually trying to make lives better for the average, everyday Canadian in the middle class, and those working hard to join it, as the Liberals continually trumpet, they would not be imposing a carbon tax. That, in and of itself, proves the point that we need to know what this carbon tax will cost the average, everyday Canadian. The Liberals have blacked that out on the document we have been provided, and are unwilling to tell Canadians what the benefits of the carbon tax are and what it will cost everyday Canadians.

Opposition Motion—Carbon PricingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

The hon. member for Peace River—Westlock will have two minutes to complete his comments if he wishes, following question period.

Indigenous LanguagesStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

[Member spoke in SENCOTEN ].

Mr. Speaker,

I hope I did not do too much damage to the language of the W_SÁNEC people to say, “honour, thank you”, and thanks to the Algonquin people on whose territory we are now taking place in debate today.

I want to recognize indigenous languages, particularly the hard work that has been done by SENCOTEN-speaking people from within Saanich—Gulf Islands and surrounding communities.

The Coast Salish languages are precious. They are an integral part of identity, culture, and of our heritage. In speaking SENCOTEN , I want to particularly recognize that the first SENCOTEN dictionary will be released on August 22. It is a milestone.

I want to thank the work of the First People's Cultural Council and of all SENCOTEN-speaking people throughout Saanich—Gulf Islands.

HÍSW_?E

Fleur Bleue Heritage Achievement AwardStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Jean Rioux Liberal Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, every year, the Musée du Haut-Richelieu awards its Prix du mérite patrimonial Fleur bleue.

I would like to congratulate Georges Coulombe, who won a special tribute award for helping to maintain our cultural heritage by restoring a number of heritage buildings.

Alain Paquette won the individual achievement award for his historical reference work on our region's businesses.

The Musée du Fort Saint-Jean has worked hard over the past few years to develop original activities that showcase regional history and our garrison town heritage. It won the organizational achievement award.

The jury's choice award went to Domaine Trinity, a major restoration project that transformed several heritage buildings.

I would like to congratulate all these passionate people who have helped preserve and share the history and heritage of the riding of Saint-Jean.

National Lacrosse LeagueStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK

Mr. Speaker, this past Saturday, the Saskatchewan Rush celebrated yet another historic win as they knocked off the Rochester Knighthawks to capture the National Lacrosse League championship for the second time in three years.

Over 13,600 spectators began chanting 20 minutes before the game, “We want the cup”. Led by head coach Derek Keenan, the Rush took the final game 15-10, with a flurry of four goals in the fourth quarter. The Rush were led by most valuable players, Jeff Shattler and Mark Matthews. Perhaps, though, no one is happier about this victory than super fan Joyce Souka, a.k.a. Grandma Rush.

The whole the province is behind this team, and we could not be more proud. I congratulate the the NLL champs, the Saskatchewan Rush.

Violence against Health Care WorkersStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB

Mr. Speaker, last month, I met with Sandi Mowat of the Manitoba Nurses Union to discuss the rising tide of violence against health care workers.

As an emergency room physician for 20 years, I would regularly be exposed to violence, even on two occasions having been assaulted myself. However, 61% of nurses reported abuse, harassment, or assault on the job over a one-year period, leading many to suffer from the effects of PTSD. From 2006 to 2015, there were nearly 17,000 violence-related lost-time claims for health care workers. In 2016, absenteeism for full-time nurses due to illness or injury cost Canada nearly $1 billion.

It is evident that there is a need for federal engagement on this issue, which is why I introduced a motion in the health committee to study and develop recommendations on actions that the federal government could take to improve violence prevention in health care.

I would like to thank Sandi for all her work as president of the Manitoba Nurses Union, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on the committee to address this issue.

Canada Revenue AgencyStatements By Members

2 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, many people in Elmwood—Transcona are frustrated by their treatment at the hands of the Canada Revenue Agency. My office regularly hears from people who, when trying, in good faith, to get the information they need to file and pay their taxes, have not been able to get through to the CRA. They cannot see a CRA agent in person, they cannot leave a message on the phone, and do not even have the option of waiting on hold. However, if they make a mistake on their tax return, they are shown no leniency.

While hard-working people in Elmwood—Transcona are getting the runaround from the CRA, CEOs and millionaires are getting off the hook. The government has not closed the CEO stock option loophole. It continues to sign sweetheart tax treaties that allow the rich to avoid paying their fair share. KPMG has not suffered any consequences for its role in orchestrating an elaborate tax-dodging scheme.

People are tired of seeing the wealthy and well-connected bending the rules to their advantage, while everybody else is told to fall in line.

It does not have to be this way. A government with the political will to stand up for working people would fix these problems. If the government will not do it, the NDP will.

Madawaska—RestigoucheStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, with summer fast approaching, communities all across my riding will be hosting festivals, activities, and powwows. There will be something for everyone.

However, the strength of my riding resides in its open spaces, and in the beauty of its lakes, forests, and rivers. We live in the heart of the Appalachians, and nature lovers can take advantage of three beautiful mountains.

Mont Farlagne in Edmunston is a ski destination in winter, but in summer, its trails are the place to be for avid cyclists.

Sugarloaf Mountain in Atholville won the title of best downhill bike park in eastern Canada. In July, it will host the Adrenaline Bike Festival.

The last one I want to mention is Mount Carleton, the highest peak in the Maritimes. Located in the vicinity of Saint-Quentin and Kedgwick, it is a Royal Astronomical Society of Canada-designated dark sky preserve.

I invite all my colleagues and all Canadians to come and visit the Madawaska—Restigouche riding, our beautiful corner of Canada.

I wish everyone a great summer.

Hockey Night in BarrieStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON

Mr. Speaker, along with the member for Barrie—Innisfil, I am proud and pleased to announce that Hockey Night in Barrie is happening again this year at the Barrie Molson Centre on August 9.

Over the past 11 years, Hockey Night in Barrie has raised over $2 million. In the past, the money has gone directly to the RVH in Barrie, and to other great hospitals around the region. The money has been used for cancer care and the Hearts & Minds campaign.

This year, the money will be used for the prenatal and postnatal intensive care units at the RVH, Easter Seals, the Canadian Mental Health Association, and the Barrie Colts Community Fund. These charities do tremendous work in our community, and we are very happy to be supporting them.

Every year, Hockey Night in Barrie gets bigger and better, and this year will be no exception. Over the next few weeks we will be announcing another all-star lineup.

I would like to thank all the volunteers who make this event such a success. As well, I would like to thank Patrick Brown, who started this 11 years ago and has turned Hockey Night in Barrie into one of the premier charity events in the country.

We are looking forward to another sold-out game, and we hope to see everyone there.

Armed Forces Day in North BayStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON

Mr. Speaker, yesterday my hometown of North Bay, Ontario, hosted the eighth annual Armed Forces Day. It is an opportunity to celebrate the important relationship between the city's military and civilian communities. It is one of the largest celebrations of its kind in Canada, with air demonstrations and ground displays.

I am proud to say that 22 Wing North Bay is the centre of Canada's North American Aerospace Defense Command operations, better known as NORAD, the important binational organization that monitors and defends North America.

This year marks the 60th anniversary of NORAD, making this year's event even more significant. It is an opportunity for us to honour our past, protect our present, and secure our future.

Canadian and American NORAD personnel, along with civilian personnel, work side by side on this important mission.

On behalf of our city and our country, I would like to salute the men and women who ensure our safety, and thank them for keeping North America strong and free.

Pride MonthStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, in 1993, I ran on a promise of LGBTQ2+ equality in law and in fact. As a physician, I had seen how discrimination affected my patients. This Pride month, in the so-called “Year of the Queer”, I reflect on what pride means to this community: the ability to stand, after lifetimes in the closet, as equal citizens, and openly declare, “We are here, we are queer, and we are proud of it.”

The roots of pride date back to New York's Stonewall protests in June 1969, when drag queens took to the streets after one too many police raids, in an act of pride and defiance.

Across Canada, cities will host parades to celebrate LGBTQ2+ pride. Vancouver's 40th parade is on August 5. This will be my 26th year of participation. As a wannabe diva, I will dance, costumed, in the parade, in eight-inch heels. I am prepping my costume now. I will be proud to walk with the LGBTQ2+ community.

Happy Pride Month.

MarijuanaStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

Dean Allison Conservative Niagara West, ON

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, recently tabled Bill C-330. This bill intended to give property owners more say as to whether or not marijuana can be produced on their properties. The Liberals voted against it.

It is known that marijuana odours negatively affect property values and the quality of life for other residents. My constituents in the town of Pelham are concerned about strong odours from a local marijuana production facility. The smell is overpowering from as far as one kilometre away. The local municipality and Health Canada are debating jurisdiction, and because of this nothing is being done.

The Liberals are trying to pass a marijuana bill in a hurry, while ignoring all the warning signs and failing to deal with the potential consequences of a rushed legislation. In their rush, they have left landlords and residents with no protection.

My constituents are asking for clear rules and the ability to enforce these rules with respect to marijuana production, even more so now that recreational marijuana is right around the corner. All Canadians deserve to have a say in their communities.