House of Commons Hansard #296 of the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was premiers.

Topics

line drawing of robot

This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Petitions

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency Meeting Members debate a Conservative motion calling for a televised emergency meeting of first ministers on the carbon tax crisis and its financial burden. Conservatives argue the tax is ineffective, increases costs, and provinces should opt out, citing Canada's low environmental ranking. Liberals defend carbon pricing as effective, noting rebates make most families better off, and accuse Conservatives of misinformation. NDP and Bloc members discuss alternative pricing systems and broader affordability issues like corporate greed and housing, while the Green Party emphasizes the urgent climate crisis. 45400 words, 5 hours in 3 segments: 1 2 3.

Advance Disclosure of Budget Measures Bloc MP raises a point of privilege regarding the government's pre-budget announcements, arguing they violate budget secrecy, hinder opposition work, potentially cause insider trading, and ask the Speaker to rule. 900 words.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives focus heavily on the rising cost of living, blaming it on the government's spending and the carbon tax, which they want to axe. They highlight increased food bank use, especially among military families, and push for Bill C-234 to make food cheaper. They also criticize the housing crisis and government's failure to build homes, and raise concerns about alleged government censorship.
The Liberals defend their approach to fighting climate change and the carbon price, stating most families get more back via the rebate. They highlight investments in healthcare, child care, housing, and the new dental program for seniors, contrasting their actions with Conservative opposition and alleged austerity. They also mention modernizing defence and internet connectivity.
The Bloc criticizes federal interference in Quebec's jurisdictions like health, child care, and mental health, demanding the government transfer money instead. They also highlight the government's neglect of federal issues and delays for temporary foreign workers.
The NDP criticize the government for delaying climate action, giving subsidies to big oil and gas, and cancelling the greener homes program. They also discuss the new dental care program and the GIS clawback for seniors.

Stopping Internet Sexual Exploitation Act Second reading of Bill C-270. The bill C-270 requires commercial distributors of pornographic material to verify the age and express consent of depicted individuals before uploading, aiming to place the onus on companies rather than survivors. Speakers discussed how it complements government legislation like Bill C-63, which focuses on takedowns after content is online, and the need for updated laws on AI-generated content. 7700 words, 1 hour.

Constitution Act, 1867 Second reading of Bill C-347. The bill [Bill C-347] proposes allowing Members of Parliament and Senators an [optional oath of office], in addition to or instead of the current oath of allegiance to the monarch. [Supporters] view it as a [modern, inclusive choice] reflecting Canadian identity. [Opponents] express concern it [undermines historical ties] or is not the right approach to discuss the monarchy's role. 7500 words, 1 hour.

Adjournment Debate - Carbon Pricing Genuis champions Bill C-234, seeking to exempt farmers from the carbon tax. He believes the tax is punitive and irrational when applied to farming. Van Koeverden defends the carbon pricing system, stating that 97% of on-farm fuels are exempt and rebates offset costs, blaming provincial taxes and corporate greed for fuel prices. 3500 words, 25 minutes.

Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Madam Speaker, the member made reference to Pierre Elliott Trudeau, whom many Canadians have respected as one of Canada's greatest prime ministers for a lot of his efforts and the things he brought in, like Canada's Charter of Rights and the repatriation of the Constitution, at the very least. I think the member undervalues that. It is interesting that he wanted to highlight the past, although he has often criticized me for bringing back some of the disasters of the Stephen Harper era.

Maybe he can justify how it is that Stephen Harper had a mega, multi-billion dollar surplus handed to him, which he converted into a multi-billion dollar deficit. That was before the recession took place. How does he justify that Stephen Harper's government did not balance the budget? Even during the last year of Stephen Harper's government, he had to sell off shares of GM at a huge discount to try to give the impression that he balanced the books.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB

Madam Speaker, that question is quite laughable. First of all, there was a lot of disinformation in that question. However, I think the point to be made is that we faced an economic crisis. His party's reaction, by the way, at the time, was to form a coalition with the Bloc and NDP to try and take down the government right after an election. That was the response of the Liberals.

Of course, anyone who was in the House would remember that our government could not spend enough to satisfy the Liberals. Every single question at the time was about why we were not spending more. The biggest difference from then until now is that we immediately laid out a plan to get back to balance by 2015. We followed that plan absolutely, to a T.

The member's government inherited the incredible fiscal situation we had in Canada at that time.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

NDP

Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB

Madam Speaker, I know my hon. colleague from Alberta deeply shares the love of our province, like many do at home. The reality is that they are stuck between the question of whether the carbon tax is truly hurting their bottom dollar, while also trying to find ways to feed their families.

We can see a kind of hypocrisy in place, particularly with respect to the Conservatives' policy on the carbon tax, which increased on April 1 by three cents at the same time that Danielle Smith, the Conservative Premier of Alberta, increased the gas tax by four cents. That kind of hypocrisy is, I think, something that Canadians are reeling from. It is something they cannot get a path forward on.

I also want to comment on the fact that we have even seen in Alberta the reason Harper had such surpluses in his budget. It was that he weakened oil, for example. The purchase or takeover of Nexen by China was given the green light by the Conservatives at that time in order to balance their budget. They, of course, wanted to tell the Canadian public that they were balancing it, but today we are paying the penalty for that.

It is hard to believe the Conservatives are genuinely addressing the problem of affordability because, I think, it is in a way that Canadians cannot understand. The carbon tax is three cents. That is the Prime Minister's fault, but the leader of the Conservative Party in Alberta increased it by four cents. How does he justify that?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB

Madam Speaker, I do not know what is going on today. It might be an effect of the eclipse yesterday or whatever, but I wonder if the hon. member knows that we are in the Canadian House of Commons here, talking about what the federal government is doing. We are both members of opposition parties, but only one of us is actually taking our role seriously to oppose the government. The member votes for the government every single time he has an opportunity.

I will hearken back to the days of Stephen Harper and take a look at this New York Times article, which states that “middle-class incomes in Canada—substantially behind in 2000—now appear to be higher than in the United States.” That is from 2014. The article talks about an income survey. It reads, “But other income surveys conducted by government agencies suggest that since 2010”, which was the time of the global economic meltdown, “pay in Canada has risen faster than pay in the United States and is now most likely higher.” That was in 2014. We are in a completely different circumstance now because of the member's party supporting the government.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jake Stewart Conservative Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Madam Speaker, today Conservatives are asking the House to declare that the Prime Minister convene a carbon tax emergency meeting with all first ministers. This meeting must address the ongoing carbon tax crisis and the financial burden it places on Canadians, the Prime Minister's recent 23% carbon tax increase, and plans for provinces to opt out of the federal carbon tax to pursue other responsible ideas to lower emissions, given that under the government's current environmental plan, Canada now ranks 62 out of 67 countries on the climate change performance index. The motion also asks that this meeting be publicly televised and held within five weeks of the motion being adopted.

The Prime Minister just does not understand that if we tax the farmer who grows the food and the trucker who then ships it, we end up taxing the family that purchases it. Then we put the burden on Canadian citizens, and that is exactly what the government continues to do. That is why 70% of Canadians and 70% of provincial premiers oppose the carbon tax increase. Three premiers even warned Liberals in Ottawa personally that the latest carbon tax increase will push Canadians over the edge. I will let my good friend from Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame highlight what it means for the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, who was the Prime Minister's campaign chair when he ran for leader, to call for this emergency meeting with all premiers.

Premier Andrew Furey must be worried. I am told things are so bad for the Liberals in Newfoundland and Labrador that in a recent by-election, with another under way as we speak, the Liberal provincial candidates are not even calling themselves Liberals anymore on their own lawn signs. That is a rarity in the country, especially for Newfoundland, and they are not even using the colour red, which the Liberals have owned since the Lester Pearson era in the 1960s, after the red maple leaf flag was adopted.

Over the past two weeks, when I was back in Miramichi—Grand Lake, everyone I ran into wanted to talk about three things: obviously, the eclipse and where best to watch it, but, more importantly, the affordability crisis hammering people and the negative impact of the inflationary carbon tax. Many may have seen the sad story out of Gagetown, New Brunswick, home to Canada's largest army base but now a place where 40 to 50 military families a week visit the local food bank just to feed their kids. Gagetown food bank usage has doubled, with more and more seniors not able to feed themselves either.

A Canadian food charity recently reported this year that it expects a million additional visits to food banks just in 2024, after record-breaking visits in 2023, including two million in just a single month last year. New Brunswickers are being forced to choose between filling up their cars, heating their homes and feeding their families.

Last week, on April 1, New Brunswickers woke up to the world's worst April Fool's Day joke, as the NDP-Liberal coalition hiked the carbon tax by 23%. This is just the next step in its disastrous plan to quadruple the carbon tax over the next six years, making everything more expensive for everyone in our country. Even worse, the New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board invoked its interrupter clause the very next day, spiking gas prices another eight cents a litre overnight. We can imagine the hurt in New Brunswick.

After the NDP-Liberal coalition's carbon tax increase, the maximum price for a litre of regular self-serve gas in New Brunswick was $1.75. The next morning, it was $1.83 per litre. It is painful every time New Brunswickers fill up their tanks.

Last week's April Fool's Day tax hike makes it clear, though, that Canadians will experience no relief so long as the NDP-Liberal coalition is in power. During the Easter break, I also went to Prince Edward Island in search of the famous subway in Charlottetown. The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance told islanders they should use their bicycles instead of driving their carbureted cars to work. Lo and behold, I could not find a subway in Prince Edward Island. I drove around and looked for it, as I thought I might have missed something over the years, but I sure found a lot of upset farmers and truckers.

Someone with a trucking company, a company that has over 100 trucks on the road, told me something, and I want people in the House to really listen to this example. For those listening at home, this will give a little insight into the long-term plan. These trucking companies have been told that by 2035, they are all supposed to be changed to electric transports. An electric transport costs a quarter of a million dollars more right now than the transports that companies are currently using. Imagine, in another nine years in this country, how much that price is going to go up.

For potato growers, processors and shippers, it really is a tax on a tax on a tax. The average farmer is now paying $150,000 a year on what they call the “weather tax” on the island. I remember being an energy critic in New Brunswick, probably back in 2014-16; I had been like the understudy for the previous energy minister. It was said at the time that it would take 80 to 90 years to even make an honest effort to get off fossil fuels in this country. That statistic, which was from 2014, was researched. In 2014, we thought it was going to take 100 years to get off fossil fuels, and that was pushing it.

Here we are, 10 years later, and people can now understand why this radical ideology is costing them, and they cannot afford to live any more. This ideology does not make sense. Canada is fuelled by oil and gas. The world knows it. We are inventors in that category. We develop it better than anybody else. We refine it better than anybody else. We have the best labour laws. We have the best environmental standards. We are literally number one around the globe for that, so it is a very shameful attempt by the Liberal government to try to rewrite history.

The notion that the NDP-Liberal coalition can tax the weather to bring down greenhouse gas emissions is a falsehood. Trying to encourage residents in Miramichi—Grand Lake to transition away from gas-powered cars and trucks is foolhardy. I represent a large, mostly rural district, but it does include the city of Miramichi. According to the ChargeFinder website, there are three charging stations in Miramichi: one at the community college, one at Northumberland Square mall and one near the city hall. Those are facts. There are three charging stations for more than 57,000 people who live around that basin, including the outskirts of the city. That math does not add up. That does not make sense for anybody.

The response from the Prime Minister that there is no need for an emergency meeting, since he already convened one with premiers in 2016, is simply ridiculous. Do members find it a bit odd not only that the meeting was eight years ago, but also that none of the people now serving as premiers were in office at that time? This is an entirely new slate of first ministers the Prime Minister is ignoring while 70% of them plus, and growing, disagree with him. The NDP-Liberal coalition must listen to Canada's premiers who are calling for an emergency meeting on the carbon tax.

On this side of the House, Conservatives will work with Canada's premiers to bring home lower prices for all Canadians. In Miramichi—Grand Lake, everywhere I go, I hear the hurt that it is causing people. We used to have a median household income of $34,000, and that stat would be a few years old now, but we can imagine, in a rural area like mine, how hard this is hitting people. Our leader has been clear since day one that only common-sense Conservatives would bring home lower prices and would axe the tax on everything for everyone for good. I think Canadians are finally realizing, despite all the hurt, that there is actually hope in this country. The hope in this country is that our leader, the hon. member for the riding of Carleton, has shown time and time again that he sees the hurt that Liberal policies are causing Canadians, and he wants to put policies in place to put money in their paycheques.

We should not be paying this. When I was on the island, the media, CBC of course, asked me, “If you axe the tax, would you axe the rebate?” I looked at the reporter and said that there would be no need for a rebate if we were not taxing the citizens. Then, I had to remind him that the Parliamentary Budget Officer said that people on the island were losing at least $400 or more per month after achieving a rebate.

It was a pleasure to speak to this. To conclude, the Prime Minister needs to listen, and he needs to convene this meeting and needs to stop hurting Canadians.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Madam Speaker, I look around the world North America, and I see that countries like Germany, Italy, France, or the European Union as a whole, the U.K., or England, Mexico, and a growing number of states in the United States, are bringing in a price on pollution. The Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Green Party all recognize that a price on pollution is the best way to deal with it.

Contrary to what the member just finished saying, 80% of Canadians do get more money back in the form of the rebate than they pay for the tax. Having said that, there is an incredible incentive there. Why has the Conservative Party of Canada chosen to intentionally mislead Canadians with false information, in an attempt to have a bumper sticker so that they can get votes by saying “axe the tax”?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Jake Stewart Conservative Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would say that the member opposite has clearly misread the memo where the Parliamentary Budget Officer for the House said that Canadians are paying more than $700 per household after getting the rebate, and each province has a different number. Some are at thresholds well over $1,000 and some are a little below. Everybody is losing money; that has been proven in the House.

The parliamentary secretary opposite mentioned Germany and a few countries in Europe, and he talked about a cost on pollution. He should have mentioned where Germany, England and France get their energy supply. They get it from Russia. That is where they get it because of what the Prime Minister of this country said. We have one of the largest deposits of natural gas in Canada, in my province, and we have a really short boat ride over to England. If we were to develop our natural gas, which the Prime Minister historically said is uneconomical, they would not have to buy their energy from Putin so that the Liberals could continue to fuel the war machine over there.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, the way the motion reads, it calls it a “carbon tax emergency”. Right now, we are seeing global ocean temperatures higher than ever in history. We had 100 dormant fires in northern Alberta for the first time in our history. On Vancouver Island, where I live, we are 54% below the average snowpack, like most of British Columbia. There are drought-like conditions right across the Prairies. That is an emergency. That is called a climate emergency.

I am going to read a quote from Sandy Garossino. She was at the energy talks in Parksville. She stated on X, “Please stop talking like a teenager trying to get out of family chores.” That comment was directed at Conservatives.

Is my colleague going to offer any solutions today to tackle the climate emergency, or is he going to continue to try to get out of doing his chores, like everybody else?

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Jake Stewart Conservative Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Madam Speaker, I find it interesting that it is coming from a party where obviously the members are running to retire because they have sold their souls, and now, they do not want to face that on the door step. I get that because they sold their soul and now they are going to have to deal with it at somebody's doorstep.

The member talked about forest fires. In New Brunswick, we had a lot of forest fires as well, and then some statistics came out, stating that 97.6% or 97.8% of all forest fires in New Brunswick were started by human beings, by human error and by arsonists. Therefore, in my province, we can attribute none of our forest fires to this climate agenda that the Liberals have.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

That's science.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB

That's fact.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Jake Stewart Conservative Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

No, Madam Speaker, it is not false; it is actually true. I know it goes against everything they spread. Every time somebody is murdered with a knife, the Liberals call for gun control. No one can even understand any of them anymore.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I do want to remind members that if they want to contribute, they should be waiting for the appropriate time. This has been going on a bit today, with back and forth. When individuals are speaking, others are trying to be part of that conversation. I just want to remind members to please avoid doing so.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I want to clarify this. Is my colleague saying that people boiled hot water and put it in the ocean, and that is the reason the oceans are—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

That is debate.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the esteemed House.

We are discussing something very important to Canadians—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Jake Stewart Conservative Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Madam Speaker, I just want to stand up on this point of order, because what the member behind me said that I said, I did not say. I said nothing—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

These are not points of order. They are points of debate.

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay has a point of order.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to support my colleague. It is really unfair for the NDP members to talk about science when there are Conservatives in the room. I think it puts us all at a great disadvantage.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

This is the time to be debating the subject matter that is before the House, the opposition motion. I would ask members to please wait until the appropriate time.

I would also ask members to not be speaking and having conversations while the hon. member is speaking.

The hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Madam Speaker, respect and decorum in the House should be the first thing that all members come to an agreement on and behave accordingly.

I will be splitting my time with the hon. member from the beautiful province of Nova Scotia, the hon. member for Kings—Hants, a good friend and a dear colleague.

Before beginning the discussion on the heart of the debate, let us just put a simple fact out there. Today, we found out that the world has experienced its hottest March on record, marking the 10th straight month of breaking global temperatures, according to the EU Copernicus Climate Change Service.

The month of March 2024 is the hottest March on record due to climate change, and we have an opposition party with half or three-quarters of its members do not even realize or believe that climate change is real and that we need to act. They have absolutely no plan.

I understand I have a heckler—

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the member has made an accusation that 50% of the Conservatives do not believe in climate change. I think he needs to prove it. Maybe it is 100%.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

That is a point of debate.

I do want to ask other members who have been making comments while the hon. member is speaking to please refrain from doing so until the appropriate time.

The hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Madam Speaker, the world has experienced its hottest March on record, marking the 10th straight month of global temperature records being broken, according to the European Union's Copernicus Climate Change Service. That is a fact.

To my residents in Vaughan—Woodbridge, next week, on April 15, the Canada carbon rebate lands in their back accounts, lands in their mail and returns fuel charge proceeds to Canadians. Dollar for dollar, what we collected is remitted to the provinces, to those individuals. The average family of four in Ontario receives $1,120. We know that eight out of 10 families, where the backstop has been put in place due to lack of action on the provincial front, are better off. Specifically, middle- and lower-income families are much better off.

We owe it to our future generations, to my kids, to all the parents sitting in the House and to all the Canadians who have kids. We need to leave a strong economy and a healthy, clean environment. We have a plan. The opposition does not have a plan. They are full of hot air. We saw it this morning. I say that respectfully; they are full of hot air.

When it comes to fighting climate change, if we look around the world and look at the policies being adopted, whether it is in Australia, China or Europe, they are all moving to decarbonization. We know the world is going that way. We either get on the bus or stay off the bus and be left behind.

I thank my colleagues for giving me their attention today as we discuss an issue that is vital for the future of our country and our planet. Forest fires and other natural disasters are being exacerbated by climate change.

Over the past few years, we have seen an increase in the number and intensity of these phenomena, with disastrous repercussions on our ecosystems, our communities and our economy. The figures are alarming. In 2023, we set a new record, and not in a good way.

Last year, 8.8 million hectares burned, breaking the 1989 record of 7.6 million hectares. Our projections show that the situation is going to get worse if we do not take meaningful action immediately. Global warming is also causing prolonged droughts and heatwaves, creating favourable conditions for fires to spread.

In addition, the number of forest fires is increasing as melting glaciers and shrinking snow cover free up land that was previously covered in ice. These events are having a direct impact on our infrastructure, our agricultural systems, our water resources and the health of our communities.

The total cost of climate-related natural disasters in Canada is already significant, and it is steadily climbing. There were nearly $3.1 billion in claims related to natural disasters in 2023. In addition, more than 1.5 million high-risk households are unable to get affordable flood insurance.

Climate change cannot be denied, and its effects are indisputably being felt across the country. This is an urgent problem.

When I speak with my constituents, I tell them that we have to deal with climate change and we have to deal with the climate crisis. We know that we have a plan in place. The other party does not. It does not and it does not want to. It does not want to deal with problems. It does not want to deal with the crisis. It has these clichéd slogans that do not work and that spread misinformation. We know that we need to deal with this issue. We know that the economy is going that way. The global economy is going that way. We know that there is only one planet. We also know that there is a transition.

Yes, I absolutely support all of the energy workers out there working in Saskatchewan, Alberta, B.C. and Newfoundland and Labrador. We need that energy, absolutely. At the same time, we need a plan in place that takes us to a net-zero world, whether that is through electric vehicles or electrifying our energy system here in Canada. We see, all over the world, that this is happening. We need to do it smartly.

When the other side pontificates about “axe the tax”, that is nonsense. Conservatives do not have a plan. They just want to rage farm. They want to scare people. They want to provide misinformation. As an economist, I know that the price on carbon is not causing inflation. It is a statistical fact, yet they still want to propagate that.

Unfortunately, some people continue to deny the reality of climate change and minimize its impact on wildfires. However, the science could not be clearer: Global warming is an indisputable reality. We must act decisively to mitigate its impact and protect our communities.

That is why the Government of Canada has put in place a suite of measures to fight climate change and mitigate the risk of wildfires. A big part of that is putting a price on carbon.

A price on carbon is central to reducing emissions, whether it is on the industrial side or on the consumer side. Yes, we need folks to have alternatives, electric vehicles and thermal pumps or heat pumps. We need to make sure that our electricity system is moving toward being fully renewable and that our small businesses have the opportunity to lower their energy bills through smart programs.

We need all that stuff in place, but we need a plan in place. That is what is called responsible leadership. That is what a government is elected to do, to provide responsible leadership. It is not clichés. It is not misleading folks that climate change is not real, for God's sake, and not even believing in climate change and saying that there is no issue out there, when we just had the month of March as the hottest month on record for that month.

We need to be smart. We need to go where the puck is going or, as my daughters would say, where the soccer ball is. We need to make sure that we put those goals in the other opponent's net, i.e., have a competitive economy. That is what we need to do while we support those hard-working energy workers who are out there doing what they need to do, and I support them.

At the same time, we need to foster economic growth and job creation in clean technology sectors like renewable energy and energy efficiency. In provinces where the federal fuel charge applies, eight out of 10 families will get more money back through the Canada carbon rebate than they pay for carbon pricing.

Eight out of 10 Canadian families are made better off under the pricing pollution system. Folks may not want to believe that. That is fine, but it is the truth. In Ontario, on April 15, families in Vaughan—Woodbridge and across this beautiful province that I live in, and Canada is beautiful of course but Ontario more so, will receive their carbon rebates. I want to make sure that they know that.

Opposition Motion—Carbon Tax Emergency MeetingBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Madam Speaker, let us just put some facts on the record here.

Catherine McKenna, when she was the climate minister, deleted 100 years of climate data in this country. We can leave it up to debate as to why she did that.

Let us go to an organization that has actually been collecting data for a very long period of time. Let us use their data and see what it says. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the United States has some weather data that says that this past March was only the 17th warmest in the last 130 years. In fact, March was 2°F colder than it was in 1905.

There is data out there that tells everybody that what he said was, in fact, a mistruth. I am just wondering what the member would have to say about that and the fact that there is actual real data out there. He did not use any data in his arguments, but there are organizations that actually have it.