Madam Speaker, I have a procedural question for my friend. He is very much into making arguments about technical details. He knows we are in the House having a debate about a motion that would make no legislative change whatsoever and responds to a political emergency the government faces, which is that it saw the Green Party win a by-election.
Meanwhile, while the government is proposing a non-binding motion, with no legislative impact whatsoever, as opposed to proposing legislation that could address the issues it says it is concerned about, it is increasing taxes on everyday Canadians as part of its environmental plan, while giving subsidies to other Canadians who are supposedly doing very well in the name of the environment.
I have a two-part question.
First, why is the government not proposing legislation to respond to this issue as opposed to feeling the need to spend all this House time on a motion?
Second, why is it always everyday Canadians who have to pay more and well-connected and already successful businesses that pay less as a result of the environment? Why can it not be the other way around?