House of Commons Hansard #245 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was quebec.

Topics

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderRoyal Assent

3:35 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, I think this is an important pedagogical opportunity, because the Conservatives do not seem to understand what a coalition is in a Westminster parliamentary system. It has come to the point where it is causing a considerable amount of disorder, including interfering with the proper terms of question period.

A coalition government is where more than one party is represented in cabinet. That would mean that a member of the New Democratic Party would be eligible in question period to answer for the actions of the NDP. There is no universe in which any Liberal gives answers on behalf of New Democrats. It is why we are up asking questions in question period every day of the government and not mincing words. The idea that we are in a governing coalition and somehow Liberals get to answer for our actions is completely unacceptable.

It has come to the point that it is making a mockery of question period, which Conservatives get up and say is a sanctity in this place. While I am inclined to agree that question period is one of the more important moments in the parliamentary day, the fact of the matter is that if they are going to talk about the sanctity of Parliament, they should bother to learn the rules.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderRoyal Assent

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Greg Fergus

I am hoping that we can close this matter. I have heard from all members of the House, and I think I have a pretty full understanding of the issues raised. I would like to thank all members who participated.

I thank the member for New Westminster—Burnaby, and I will get back to the House. Unless there is a pressing and novel point, I suggest that we close this subject.

The member for Kingston and the Islands.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderRoyal Assent

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, in light of the comments that were just made by my NDP colleague, I note there is a distinct difference between a supply and confidence agreement and a coalition. We just have to look at some of the parliamentary systems that take place in Europe, for example, where genuine coalitions are formed. To the member's point, they end up with a government that is representative of various parties. That is not the case here, and I want to support my NDP colleague's comments with that.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Mr. Speaker, it is obviously an honour to speak here today.

After eight years of this costly NDP-Liberal coalition, Canadians are facing the worst affordability crisis in decades. This crisis is driven by out-of-control government spending, which has caused the highest inflation in 40 years. That is why the Leader of the Conservative Party has proposed the common-sense motion we are debating here today. Here is the motion: “That, given that the government has announced a ‘temporary, three-year pause’ to the federal carbon tax on home heating oil, the House call on the government to extend that pause to all forms of home heating.”

This is a reasonable, common-sense and fair-minded motion. It is what we will be voting on in this House on Monday. The Prime Minister gave to some and now he needs to give to all.

Let us be clear about this. The Conservatives are proposing a national common-sense solution that, if adopted today, will provide a real cost reduction for all Canadians. This is actually a very easy fix. A simple majority of MPs is all that is needed, and the home heating carbon tax would be removed. Unfortunately for all Canadians, we know that the NDP and the Liberals in this chamber have it in their minds to make life as unaffordable for Canadians as possible.

I think it is fair to say that everybody understands that the carbon tax is making life more expensive. It is especially making food more expensive. The NDP-Liberal government is taxing the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who brings the food to us and the processor and any other business that touches that food. The end result is that food costs more, 6% more in just September.

Members should not just trust my math. Last week, the Governor of the Bank of Canada, Tiff Macklem, confirmed this. He said that if the carbon tax were eliminated, it would lower inflation by 0.6%. Let us think about that. The latest inflation rate was 3.8%. If the carbon tax were eliminated, it would get us one-third of the way to the target rate of 2%, and interest rates could start coming down. Instead, this cold-hearted NDP-Liberal government wants to keep prices high for all Canadians.

Before I get into how the NDP-Liberals pit one region of Canada against another, perhaps I should spell out for everyone just how harmful the carbon tax actually is. In Saskatchewan, two-fifths of our electricity comes from natural gas, two-fifths from coal and the balance from other sources, so 80% of our electricity is generated from fossil fuels extracted from the ground. Our home heating comes from that same natural gas extracted from the ground. Very few people use oil to heat homes in Saskatchewan. Those are the facts.

Now here is the rub, or should I say the great political shell game that the NDP-Liberals are pulling on Canadians, specifically the good folks of Saskatchewan. It is called the carbon tax, and it is not just one carbon tax; no, that would be too easy. It is not just the second carbon tax, which came into effect on April Fool's Day of this year. There is also a third carbon tax called the clean energy regulations, specifically aimed at Alberta and Saskatchewan. The Minister of Environment unveiled it this past summer to force the shutdown of our natural gas and coal electrical power plants. As I said, 80% of our energy is generated by those two forms of energy, and the NDP-Liberal Minister of Environment has ordered that our power plants be shut down. All of this, of course, is supported by the NDP.

Let me make this clear. Here is the NDP plan for the people of Saskatoon West. The original carbon tax was strike one. The second carbon tax was strike two. The shutdown of 80% of electrical generation in Saskatchewan is strike three.

Today's debate is not about electricity. It is about heating our homes and how we do that. How will the carbon tax affect that? First off, last week, the Prime Minister made an announcement that his NDP-Liberal coalition will be removing the carbon tax from home heating oil. He did this for the explicit purpose of winning votes in Atlantic Canada.

How do we know that? First, at his announcement, he was surrounded by every single Atlantic Liberal member of Parliament. Second, one of his cabinet ministers from Newfoundland said as much to CTV on the weekend, when she chastised Alberta and Saskatchewan for not electing Liberal MPs. Her claim was that if a riding did not vote Liberal, the Prime Minister does not care about them. Therefore, no carbon tax break for natural gas home heating in Saskatchewan. It is mostly Atlantic Canadians who use oil to heat their homes. Back on the Prairies, we use much greener natural gas to heat our homes.

This is how the Liberals are using the carbon tax to pit one region of the country against another for political advantage. In Saskatchewan, we do not take this lying down. Saskatchewan has repeatedly been treated as a poor cousin when it comes to environmental policy, which is ludicrous because we care more than anyone about our environment.

Our farmers depend on a healthy environment to make a living. They have been adopting green practices for decades, long before the government even cared, and do not need government handouts to accomplish this. They did this on their own because it makes sense, and they continue to make the best decisions for their farms and, by extension, for the environment. Let us not forget about the vast amounts of carbon stored in Saskatchewan, on our farms, in our forests or in our carbon capture and storage projects.

This mistreatment and unfairness is very frustrating and only adds costs to the industries and people of Saskatchewan. My Saskatchewan colleagues and I have been working hard to fight against this inequity from Ottawa, and so has the premier. This NDP-Liberal carbon tax plan that rewards Atlantic Canada and penalizes Saskatchewan definitely needed a response.

Let me tell the House what the premier has said in response to all of this. He has promised to have our natural gas supplier, SaskEnergy, stop collecting the carbon tax on home heating in my province. This will level the playing field with Atlantic Canada. Here is what he said said about this:

As premier, it's my job to ensure Saskatchewan residents are treated fairly and equally with our fellow Canadians in other parts of the country.... [I]t's the federal government that has created two classes of taxpayers by providing an exemption for heating oil, an exemption that really only applies in one part of the country and effectively excludes Saskatchewan.

Lest anyone thinks this is just a bluff, I can report that only a few hours ago in the Saskatchewan legislature, the following motion passed. Let me read it:

That this Assembly calls on all Members of Parliament to support the Opposition Motion being debated November 2nd, 2023 in the House of Commons that reads as follows:

“That, given that the government has announced a 'temporary, three-year pause' to the federal carbon tax on home heating oil, the House call on the government to extend that pause to all forms of home heating.”

Not only did this motion pass, but it passed unanimously. Let me break that down. That means Saskatchewan Party MLAs voted in favour of this. It also means that NDP MLAs voted unanimously in favour.

Will the NDP in this House rise to the challenge and choose common sense over political games? I am not optimistic. Here in Ottawa, the spineless and directionless NDP supports the Liberals every single time. The Liberals say to jump and the NDP asks how high. I encourage them to take a cue from their provincial brothers and sisters and support our motion to pause the carbon tax on all forms of home heating.

After eight years of the Liberal government, we know that one of its favourite tools is division, and this carbon tax policy change is a great example. When the going gets tough, the Prime Minister divides. Why does he do this? It is to distract and to pit one person against the other. He divides by race, by sexuality, by vaccine status and now by region because he knows that when Canadians are arguing with each other, they do not notice what the government is doing. He does not care if it tears the country apart because this gives the NDP-Liberal coalition the ability to get away with so many things: corruption, giving money to their friends and bad legislation. This list goes on and on of all the scandals that have happened.

This “gift” to Atlantic Canada is a clear attempt to buy votes, but Atlantic Canadians are not fooled by these tricks. They know that, heaven forbid, if the Liberal government were to be re-elected, it would quickly end the temporary pause and continue on its path to quadruple the carbon tax. The Prime Minister may have fooled Canadians once or twice, but we will not be fooled anymore.

I know what I have said today is hard for MPs of the NDP-Liberal coalition government to hear. The truth is that after eight years of the NDP-Liberal government, it has, first, spiralled government spending out of control; second, borrowed ridiculous amounts of money that has doubled our national debt in only three years; third, endlessly printed money, which causes inflation, as clearly confirmed by the Bank of Canada; fourth, drastically raised interest rates, causing mortgage payments and rent to soar uncontrollably; and fifth, to top that off, told us to eat cake as it raises taxes in the form of multiple carbon taxes.

We cannot afford this costly coalition. We need a government that will scrap the carbon tax and balance the budget to ease inflation and lower interest rates. It is time for Canadians to elect a common-sense Conservative government. Let us bring it home.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I am curious. The member is from Saskatchewan, so when his constituents call him to ask about home heating oil and why Atlantic Canada will have the price on pollution removed from it, and solely Atlantic Canada because that is the way Conservatives are portraying it, I am wondering if he corrects them and says, no, it is for all people in Canada who use oil to heat their homes. As a matter of fact, he said the majority were in Atlantic Canada. That is not true. There are twice as many people in the province of Ontario heating with oil who will benefit from this than there are in Atlantic Canada.

The question is very simple: Does he try to correct the policy and tell people the reality of it, or does he perpetuate the falsehoods that Conservatives are trying to distribute among the population?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Madam Speaker, rather than perpetuating falsehoods, in reality, I just want to do a bit of math for the hon. member.

The government has said that it is going to give $10,000 to provide heat pumps. I am not sure if it has actually done this math. By my calculations, there are probably 400,000 homes in Atlantic Canada that will need heat pumps, and 400,000 times 10,000 is $4 billion.

That is just in Atlantic Canada. There are needs across the country as well.

One thing that has not been talked about in this whole proposal by the government is the actual cost of this heat pump subsidy. It is potentially billions of dollars, and nobody has talked about that. I am not sure if they even know that.

I just wanted to get that on the record and maybe invite them to do a little bit of homework on that side of the page.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister was wrong to introduce regional divisiveness into Canada's carbon pricing system, but he was not the first person to do that. Actually, the Conservatives have been talking about taking off the carbon tax as though it would save every Canadian money, when it surely would not.

All sorts of provinces have their own carbon pricing scheme, and the federal backstop does not apply there.

He talks about an NDP plan, but he did not mention anything to do with our plan, which was to take GST off home heating. Why would we do that? We have an established tradition of not charging GST on essentials. GST applies everywhere in the country, which means every Canadian would get a break. Moreover, it would apply to all forms of home heating, including when people heat their homes with electricity.

When we presented an amendment last year to one of their carbon tax motions, they said no. When we presented a motion today to take the GST off in parts of the country where the federal carbon tax does not apply, they said no.

Who is practising regional divisions, and why did he fail to mention the actual NDP plan, which has nothing to do with what the Liberals have proposed?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Madam Speaker, his NDP brothers and sisters in Saskatchewan voted unanimously to support this measure in the House when we vote on it on Monday.

I am curious to know if the NDP in Ottawa will actually listen and take the advice of their very good brothers and sisters in Saskatchewan. They are very close, yet I am not convinced that they are going to listen to them.

This is something that NDP members in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are all saying needs to change. I just want to put a bug in his ear and that of the whole NDP here.

Will they support this motion, as their brothers and sisters have in Saskatchewan?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

An hon. member

B.C. has its own carbon tax. You know that. Say it out loud.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

If an hon. member has questions, they can wait for questions and comments.

The hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

November 2nd, 2023 / 3:50 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Madam Speaker, the member mentioned B.C. He knows full well that B.C. has its own carbon tax. It was introduced by the Liberal-cum-Conservative government in B.C., just as there have been carbon taxes imposed by Conservative governments elsewhere in the world. What a bunch of BS that is, just as talking about an NDP-Liberal coalition is BS.

We just had a point of order before he got up to give his speech. He sat through the whole bloody thing.

If he wants to talk about the truth, he could start by telling some.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I have a great deal of respect for my colleague from Elmwood—Transcona, but using the acronym “BS” is definitely not parliamentary.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Is the hon. member rising to apologize for saying “BS”?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Madam Speaker, I do apologize for using that term. I forgot how difficult it can be to call a spade a spade in this place.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I just want to remind members to be careful about the words that they use in the House. We need to be respectful.

The hon. member for Saskatoon West.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Madam Speaker, well, let us call a spade a spade. Every single time the Liberal masters ask the NDP members in the House to do something, they do it. They vote with the government every time. We have a strong NDP-Liberal coalition.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

An hon. member

Motion No. 79. Talk about that one.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member has had an opportunity to provide input. If he has more input, he should wait until the proper moment.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, despite the fact that it may have been heckling, the member's contribution was so good that I think we should have made an exception on this one occasion.

I find it interesting that the member for Saskatoon West said, “Let us call a spade a spade”, right after he did not answer a single question he was asked. He just pivoted and went to a completely different place. I asked him about something in his speech, and rather than address the question, he totally went off and started talking about heat pumps, which I did not even hear him talk about in his speech.

This just goes to the point that I will be making in my comments, which is the fact that this is all about Conservative hypocrisy. Before I go any further, I will indicate that I will be sharing my time with the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

I find it very fascinating. At the heart of this is the issue of the price on pollution, and the reason I find it so difficult is that I feel as though, once again, it is Groundhog Day. I have given a similar speech many times before. I am talking about the same hypocrisy that comes from Conservatives in the House. What we repeatedly see is Conservative after Conservative standing up against a policy that they all ran on; some of them did so not once, but twice. Some members in here, 19 members, who ran and were elected in the 2008 election and are still here today, ran cap and trade.

Cap and trade is just another form of pricing pollution; it is just done slightly differently. However, the Conservatives ran on it. Again, of course, just in the most recent election, they ran under Erin O'Toole as their leader with their signature platform titled “The Man with the Plan”. They talked about how they were going to put a price on pollution, but rather than just giving the money back to Canadians, which is what we are doing, they would put the money into a special carbon savings account. Then, depending on how much a person grew that account, they could go out and qualify for different rewards. I imagine there would be some form of catalogue, and people would look through it, just as one would with Air Miles. Depending on how much they had built up in that carbon fund, they could get some really good prizes. Maybe they could get a really nice bicycle or something. However, if they had not spent a lot and had not built up a lot in that carbon account, they might get a smaller prize as a result.

Despite the fact that it would have been pricing pollution, the problem with that plan is that it actually incentivized people to use carbon and have a larger carbon footprint. The larger the carbon footprint a person had, the more credits they would build into this carbon account, so they could get even better prizes at the end. Their plan was immensely flawed, and our party, and all parties in this House, would never support something like that.

That is what they ran on most recently, in 2021. In 2008, 18 of them also ran on “The True North Strong and Free: Stephen Harper's plan for Canadians”. In that, as I previously mentioned, Stephen Harper outlined how his newly formed government, if elected, would bring in cap and trade. It was revolutionary at the time, at least for North America, because it was just a handful of states in the United States; Ontario, which came along a bit after that; and Quebec, which had also signed on, that were part of this North American version of cap and trade among a number of jurisdictions.

Did Stephen Harper actually implement that and put in that price on pollution? No, he did not. He completely abandoned it once he had the opportunity. However, the point is that 19 Conservatives who currently sit on that side of the House ran on that in 2008.

The hypocrisy is even better than that, because a number of the Conservative members sitting in the House right now actually sat previously in legislatures that had adopted pricing pollution. To take it a step further, they have comments in the official records of those legislatures, where they actually commit to pricing pollution.

There are many options, but I will start with the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, now a Conservative member of Parliament in this federal House. He said, while sitting in the provincial legislature in B.C.:

In 2008, our government made the decision to implement a tax on carbon. It was designed to help British Columbia reduce greenhouse gas emissions while at the same time be fair to hard-working families.

A Conservative member said that, which is literally what we are saying.

We did not even come up with that material; the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge did. He ran on it. He said that in the provincial legislature. He also went on to say:

I know that the member for Vancouver-Kensington made a comment about it and tried to blame it on the federal government, as far as revenue neutrality. Well, the fact of the matter is that we have the option of how we wanted to bring this about, as far as a carbon tax. Our policy—it's law—is to put it back into the pockets of taxpayers.

This is not a Liberal saying this; it is a current sitting member of the House in the Conservative Party who said this. Now, suddenly, he can just blindly abandon his values and principles, in terms of how he at least felt while in the provincial legislature, to follow the lead of the alt-right leader of the Conservative Party of Canada. That is the reality of what is going on.

I am always really amazed when Conservatives try to suggest that Liberals are gagged in terms of their ability to speak, when example after example comes from that side of the House.

It does not end there. There were two other members who were in the Quebec legislature and voted in favour of pricing pollution: the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent and the member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis. Both of them sat in the provincial legislature and voted in favour and helped adopt pricing pollution in Quebec.

Now they suddenly show up here at the federal level and act as though pricing pollution is the absolute worst thing one could do. How is it possible that they can be so hypocritical? A lot of people can say things about me, but I am very consistent as it relates to my position on pricing pollution; I have been from the beginning.

I want to raise something else, and this is my final point about Conservative hypocrisy. It actually involves you, Madam Speaker, and I would like to tell members what happened in this House back on October 20, 2022. You were presiding, Madam Speaker, and there was an opposition day motion from the Conservatives.

Our NDP colleagues tried to put forward a motion to build on to the motion the Conservatives had on the floor; it would basically have eliminated the GST from home heating sources. It did not even require a vote or anything. All the mover of the motion needed to do was accept it, and then it would have carried.

Madam Speaker, you said:

It is my duty to inform hon. members that an amendment to an opposition motion may be moved only with the consent of the sponsor of the motion, or in the case that he or she is not present, consent may be given or denied by the House leader, the deputy House leader, the whip or the deputy whip of the sponsor's party.

The hon. member does not have the support of the opposition; therefore, the amendment cannot be accepted.

Conservatives are just playing games with this. They did not want that to be adopted, because if it did get adopted, they would not get the political ammunition they are looking for to hold over the NDP and everybody else.

This hypocrisy was pointed out by both the parliamentary secretary to the House leader and the NDP, who have been rising on it all day long. To make matters even worse, today, the member for Timmins—James Bay again tried to amend this motion to add “and to eliminate the GST on home heating in provinces where no federal carbon tax is in place.”

The member for Battle River—Crowfoot said no; basically, it was rejected once again. One is left wondering why. Why are Conservatives acting this way? Are they really interested in the best interests of Canadians, or is this all just for political gain?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4 p.m.

Conservative

Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC

Madam Speaker, why is it that only a chosen few of the Liberal-NDP coalition are up speaking today? It is a very chosen few, much like this movement it has to only choose a few who will benefit from this carbon tax relief. We do not see the member for Calgary Skyview or members from Atlantic Canada and northern Saskatchewan speaking today. Why is it that only a chosen few are getting up to speak?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader will be speaking shortly. He is from the Prairies.

The member makes this suggestion that only a chosen few are speaking on this measure, and then he says—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB

The chosen one.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. I just want to remind members that if they have something to contribute to wait until it is time to make that contribution. There will be time for questions and comments again, but the hon. deputy government House leader has the floor right now.

The hon. deputy government House leader.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Pause on Home HeatingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I hit a nerve.

The member for Kings—Hants spoke earlier to this issue. He is from Atlantic Canada.

I can guarantee one thing. We will fill all of our spots, unlike when we had a debate earlier about India potentially being involved in the assassination of a Canadian. Do members remember that? Not a single Conservative stood up to speak. Every single Liberal spot today will be filled with a Liberal speaking.