House of Commons Hansard #264 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was conservative.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:05 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, the Government of Canada, through a procurement process, awarded Boeing hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts, and that Boeing contract is going to provide hundreds of jobs for people in Winnipeg. Substantial government dollars were used to support Boeing and our having military aircraft.

I have no problem with the Government of Canada supporting industries that are going to provide good, sound jobs, either directly or indirectly, whether they are directly focused in the province of Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba or any other region of the country. It is an issue of fairness, and this government has been fair with respect to this particular project. Whether it is with Volkswagen or Stellantis, unlike the Conservative Party, we see these as investments that are going to ultimately build a stronger, healthier industry and provide good, solid middle-class jobs well into the future.

The difference is that we think of the future jobs for Canadians. We are not stuck in the past, and we are open to having a healthier environment.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Madam Speaker, I have been listening to the debate since this morning, and, as a Quebecker, I feel completely left out. Yet again, the House is debating the carbon tax, which does not apply in Quebec and has nothing to do with Quebec. Furthermore, I am wondering how the Quebec Conservative members feel about this. Every time their party moves motions, they exclude Quebec. I am wondering why they do not fight for their party to move motions about things that affect Quebeckers. On the other hand, every time the Liberals rise to speak about climate change, they make it seem like everything is hunky-dory, like it is all a bed of roses.

Canada is one the worst countries at fighting climate change. It is the only G7 country whose emissions have not dropped since 1990. According to a study by the International Monetary Fund, which can hardly be described as a far left environmental group, in 2022, Canada directly or indirectly invested $50 billion in the oil industry. I would like to ask my colleague how many social housing units he thinks $50 billion could have built.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, regarding the first aspect of the member's question, that is why I reinforced at the beginning of my comments that the real objective for the Conservative Party is to have a bumper sticker that reads, “Axe the tax”. That is really what the Conservatives are hoping to achieve. On getting rid of the price on pollution, the related facts are completely irrelevant to the Conservative Party. That is unfortunate because there is so much misinformation being spread throughout the country regarding what the Conservative Party is actually doing.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

December 7th, 2023 / 11:10 a.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Madam Speaker, here is what the Liberal government is actually doing. This morning, after a two-year wait, it finally unveiled its plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector, the emissions cap it has been touting. However, it is worse than anything we could have imagined.

Two years ago, the government said that Canadian society as a whole would have to cut its GHG emissions by 40% to 45%, but that the oil and gas sector would only have to cut its emissions by 31%. Today, we learn that that figure is no longer 31% but 16% to 20%, that the industry has no obligations to meet until 2030, and that it is free to increase oil and gas production in this country.

How does my colleague explain this climate crisis betrayal?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I would not necessarily say that is fully accurate. I was very encouraged about today's announcement, and if I had had more time, I would have really gone into it.

The government is looking at a regulated cap-and-trade system to be established under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. It would apply to all upstream oil and gas production, including offshore development as well as liquefied gas operations. Together, this represents approximately 85% of the sector's total emissions. The proposed system would include two limits: an emissions cap and a higher legal upper bound. Facilities can emit more than the emissions cap, up to the legal upper bound, by using offsets or contributing to a new decarbonization fund that would support additional reductions in the sector.

There is a lot more information available on what the government has announced today. It is a good day. It is also part of what I said earlier, which is that the government is focused on dealing with the environment. We do have a plan on the environment, unlike the official opposition.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Fredericton New Brunswick

Liberal

Jenica Atwin LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services

Madam Speaker, I wanted to go back to the piece my hon. colleague mentioned about the carbon price tax not being a tax. The carbon pricing regime on fuel charge is not a tax in constitutional terms, according to the Supreme Court of Canada. It is revenue neutral due to the rebate program and climate action incentive funds.

What this looks like in my home province is Eel Ground first nation, or Natoaganeg, a Mi'kmaq community, receiving funding to complete energy efficiency upgrades and retrofitting its band office. Also, five schools in New Brunswick have seen the Government of Canada investing carbon pricing proceeds into improve energy efficiency.

This is what is at stake, so I would like to bring the facts back to the conversation. Could the hon. colleague comment on that?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, if there is a simple message on the whole issue of what the Conservative Party is attempting to do, it is that people really need to get a better understanding of what the leader of the Conservative Party is saying. His behaviour is similar to Donald Trump's behaviour in his spreading of misinformation because misinformation is what this whole campaign is all about.

When Conservatives say that they are going to give more money back to Canadians, it is just not true. It is not true. Under the Conservatives' scheme, 80% of the residents of Winnipeg North would have money taken out of their pockets. They would lose money because of the silly and irresponsible approach the Conservative Party and the leader are taking.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North continues to spread his toxic rhetoric, rumours and innuendos, which have no basis in fact. Let us be factual here. These Liberals are going to increase the cost of food. We just learned today that the Canada food report said the price of groceries is going to go up $700-plus this next year.

We already know they are quadrupling the carbon tax on families, first nations and farmers. This individual does not understand how agriculture works. He is making our farmers less competitive. He is going to make sure we import more food from the United States, China and elsewhere because we will not be able to grow it cheaply enough here in Canada to provide healthy, nutritious food to Canadians. Will this member recognize that the Liberals are increasing food insecurity in Canada?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, let us put it this way. The Conservatives are so focused—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh!

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. The hon. member had an opportunity to ask a question. Whether he likes the answer or not, he should still be listening.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has the floor.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam. Speaker, the Conservative Party of Canada is so focused on getting rid of the price on pollution that its members are actually voting against the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement. The excuse they are using is that it is because they do not believe there should be a price on pollution in Ukraine. Ukraine has had a price on pollution since 2011. That is how ridiculously reckless the leader of the Conservative Party is. He is prepared to vote against, for the first time ever, a trade agreement between Ukraine and Canada at a time of war in Europe because they have a price on pollution.

The price on pollution is something the world is moving toward. Only the leader of the Conservative Party cannot conceptualize the negative impact his reckless policy and irresponsible approach to the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement are having, not only here in Canada, but also abroad.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, where to start? I would like to make a little detour before addressing my Conservative colleagues' motion. I would like to provide a bit of context for the motion.

In my opinion, if we want to understand the context, we need to look at the current situation. We are in a climate crisis. There are two possibilities. Either the Conservatives recognize that we are in a climate crisis and commit to taking action to mitigate it, or they do not recognize that we are in a climate crisis. Our main problem is that, ever since the member for Carleton became leader of the Conservative Party, the official opposition has been using disinformation as their preferred political tool. As a result, we cannot have conversations about global warming with our Conservative colleagues. Whenever we try to, they become irrational. My colleagues will understand why I say this.

In my former life, I taught political science. The introductory course for first-year political science students teaches a simple concept. It teaches them what democracy is. To explain what democracy is, I would tell them that one of the key principles is that it is better to use reason rather than force. That is what democracy is. Democracy means people deliberating together. It means people having a dialogue to determine what is best for the common good.

For several years now, we have been witnessing the Americanization of Canadian politics. Dialogue no longer takes precedence over threats or over the imposition of ideas. Whoever is the strongest tries to impose their law using intimidation. That is how the United States currently operates. I do not want to compare the leader of the official opposition to Donald Trump right now. Let us set that aside. I do not want to compare the leader of the official opposition to Marine Le Pen or any of those other politicians in the western world whose questionable tactics involve taking liberties with the truth to avoid entering into discussions with counterparts who often think differently. I say this because dialogue is very important.

The reason I am bringing up this topic is that we reached the bottom of the barrel yesterday. When I was younger, my mother often used to say that all things pass, meaning even a person's stupidity eventually comes to an end. I hope that we reached the bottom of the barrel yesterday. Yesterday, the Standing Committee on Natural Resources was carrying out its clause-by-clause study of Bill C-50. I have been involved in Quebec and Canadian politics since the early 1990s and, although I have always kept a close eye on parliamentary proceedings, I have never in my life seen anything as sophomoric as what I saw yesterday.

There is a key principle. We can raise questions of privilege in the House because we feel that members have the right to be heard. Letting members speak, letting members vote, is a key principle of democracy. However, even this key principle, which is fundamental to democracy, was not respected yesterday. I heard Conservative members yelling to ensure that no committee member would be able to cast a vote during clause-by-clause consideration. Worse than that, I saw some highly questionable actions on the part of the member for Brantford—Brant

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands is rising on a point of order.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Madam Speaker, I just wanted to raise a quick point of order because I was at committee all night as well with that member. We wanted to get the—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

That is a point of debate, not a point of order.

If the hon. member wants to clarify the record, that is a point of debate.

The hon. member for Jonquière.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, we can see that this nonsense has carried over to the House. My Conservative colleagues do not even want to hear what I have to say here. They are going to try to deprive me of my right to speak by raising points of order that are not actually points of order at all. I have been subjected to this for over two months at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, where they constantly raise points of order.

Madam Speaker, I would like to be able to hear myself when I speak. I would ask my colleagues not to interrupt me.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Again, I want to remind members to be respectful in the House. If they wish to have conversations they should take them outside. If they have comments and questions, then I would ask them to wait until the appropriate time. I am not sure who was having the discussions or trying to make comments, but I want to make sure that the whole House is aware that members need to be respectful when someone else has the floor.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I was having a very quiet conversation with my colleague who is sitting right beside me here. I was in no way trying to talk at that member. He—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

As I said, I do not know which comments came from whom. If individuals want to have conversations they should take them outside.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Through you to our hon. colleague, I would say that the conversation that is taking place at the Speaker's chair is indeed louder. It is not offending me, but it is indeed louder than the one that our colleague is being called out for—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I want to remind the member that I did not indicate who was making the noise, because I really did not know who it was. However, I will certainly make sure that my conversations here are quiet as well. The point is well taken.

The hon. member for Jonquière.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, I do not even have to show the House what I am talking about, because the Conservatives are doing it for me. They use this same tactic day after day at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. Earlier, I heard a Conservative say that he was just having a nice, quiet discussion with one of his colleagues. If members want to know what Conservatives think is a quiet discussion, they should have a look at the video of our meeting yesterday at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. They will see what my Conservative colleagues consider a nice, quiet discussion.

As I was saying before I was interrupted, the member for Brantford—Brant behaved in a highly questionable way. He tried to intimidate the Bloc Québécois whip and the members of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources to prevent them from speaking to a bill. As I was saying earlier, we have been dealing with this type of behaviour in the Standing Committee on Natural Resources for more than a month now. We are never sure whose turn it is to speak, which is frankly ridiculous. When I put all that together, I see what I call the “Carleton method”. It is the approach used by the leader of the official opposition, and it is based on two major but very simple strategies: on the one hand, we have intimidation and, on the other, disinformation.

As I said in my introduction, we are now at a turning point. In the face of climate change, the actions that we should take immediately will have an irreversible impact on future generations. When political parties use intimidation and disinformation in this kind of context, the only outcome is disaster.

What I am trying to do this morning is to appeal to the sense of responsibility of each and every parliamentarian. Every parliamentarian should perhaps look beyond the end of their nose and beyond the next election. They should think about their children and future generations. Unfortunately, more and more members have become extremely short-sighted, behaving like lobbyists for the oil and gas sector and refusing to listen to science, which is clearly showing us that climate change will have harmful effects on us. There are members who behave that way, who do not have the will or the integrity to tackle the problem before us head on, and who prefer to use intimidation and disinformation.

I can think of a number of examples. One of the focuses of today's debate is Bill C‑234. We saw an intimidation campaign by Conservative senators against two of their colleagues, Bernadette Clement and Chantal Petitclerc. Worse yet, I can say that I saw on the Conservatives' monitor in the lobby a photo of the two senators as if on wanted posters. We sometimes see wanted posters for criminals. The goal was of course to post these images on social media to instigate an intimidation campaign against the senators in question. We all know how social media works.

As I was saying earlier, that is the member for Carleton's method. Not so long ago, we were alerted to what the member for Carleton was capable of. The people who warned us about how the member for Carleton operates were also members from Quebec, in particular the member for Richmond—Arthabaska. He indicated a number of times that he had never seen a more hateful campaign than the one he was the victim of in his own riding. People took it upon themselves to incite the public to call him and intimidate him. As we know, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska is a former Conservative member.

The member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier also warned us. I will quote him, and it is a quote that applies perfectly to what I witnessed yesterday in committee. Here is what he said about the last Conservative leadership race: “I have never seen such an aggressive race or such vicious personal attacks”.

Well, to borrow the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier's own words, I have never seen such aggressive and vicious discussions and such savage personal attacks as I witnessed yesterday in committee.

This method in no way helps solve the problem before us, namely the climate crisis.

The Conservatives often use empty slogans like “Axe the tax”. I see it everywhere. Upon closer inspection, however, through all the rhetoric, what the Conservatives really mean is “Axe the facts”. What they are trying to do is gloss over all the scientific data that show that we need to adopt robust measures to fight climate change to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. I have never seen a Conservative proposal to introduce carbon pricing. I have never seen the Conservative Party recognize that carbon pricing is necessary if we want to transition to a low-carbon economy. The only one who ever defended that was the former leader of the Conservative Party. Unfortunately, a few members, probably from his own party, managed to get their way.

There is something else I would like to bring to my colleagues' attention. I said earlier that, in my opinion, responsible elected members use reason rather than force. That is a guiding principle of democracy, which the Conservatives do not appear to respect, preferring intimidation and disinformation.

There is another principle that is quite important. I believe that we were elected to defend our constituents' interests. That is critical. Every one of us must defend our constituents' interests in this House. Here is where my bewilderment stems from. I have a colleague in this House who comes from my region. My colleague from Chicoutimi—Le Fjord is a Conservative member from the Saguenay—Lac‑Saint‑Jean region. He rose in the House to ask the government to expedite the legislative process in the Senate regarding Bill C-234, which is about reducing the tax on the fuels used for grain drying. It is linked to the carbon tax. Once again, as all members from my party keep saying, the carbon tax does not apply in Quebec.

Yet, the president of the federation Les Producteurs de lait du Québec is in the riding of the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord. He has been working tirelessly for three years with the member for Berthier—Maskinongé to have a bill passed that would stop any further breaches in supply management. This bill was passed here, in the House. It is now before the Senate. I do not want to impute motives to anyone, but we are told that Conservative senators are delaying the passage of the bill. I cannot believe that a member from the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean area who counts the president of Les Producteurs de lait du Québec among his constituents would rise in the House to defend a bill that will have no effect on his fellow citizens or on Quebec politics, but remains silent what it comes to supply management. That is a fundamental violation. Today I challenge the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord to stand up in the House and ask a question or make a statement in support of the supply management bill. That is another issue.

We heard the leader of the official opposition tell us at length that in the next election campaign, the “ballot box issue” will be carbon pricing, that is the carbon tax. We will say it again: That tax does not apply in Quebec. Clean fuel pricing already exists in Quebec; it was implemented by the Quebec government itself. I cannot understand how Conservative MPs from Quebec can support such far-fetched initiatives. These initiatives will have no impact in Quebec.

Today, I have a request for my colleagues from Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, also a Quebecker, and Louis-Saint-Laurent. I have always held the latter in high esteem. He had a career in the media and was also, at one time, a distinguished politician. I ask them to become responsible again, to set aside the Carleton method that is becoming increasingly common and to take an interest in Quebec.

The people of Quebec will repay them in kind. Federal MPs from Quebec have to advance the interests of Quebec society here in the House. My sense is that, somewhere along the way, my Conservative colleagues from Quebec clearly lost their political bearings.

I will close by saying that the motion before us today is very similar to many of the motions we have seen in recent months. To me, this proves that the Conservative members from Quebec have no influence over their leader right now. The Conservative Party's messaging is solely focused on fossil fuels and defending the oil and gas sector.

In my opinion, the Conservative members from Quebec have very little influence. Nevertheless, I encourage them to grow a spine and stand up for the interests of Quebeckers, as my leader often says.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

Madam Speaker, I find it interesting that the Bloc, a party only from Quebec that has never formed government and will never form government, seems to take issue with the fact that Conservatives are calling for very clear and simple answers for why senators, including Senator Petitclerc from Quebec, voted to shut down debate and voted to gut a common-sense Conservative bill, Bill C-234.

I would ask the same question of Senator Paula Simons from Alberta. She voted to gut and attack it as the deputy chair of the ag committee. She is the deputy chair of the ag committee in the Senate and she voted to punish farmers.

I encourage Canadians to reach out, respectfully of course, and share their opinions with these lawmakers in our country. It is essential that they hear from affected Canadians, whether it is a person who is being forced because of the Liberal Prime Minister's policies to visit a food bank or—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax on Farmers, First Nations and FamiliesBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:35 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

We have a point of order from the hon. parliamentary secretary.