Debates of June 13th, 2024

St. Anne's Anglican Church

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Davenport residents are heartbroken. At around 8 a.m. on Sunday, June 9, our beloved St. Anne's Anglican Church was tragically destroyed in a fire, the cause of which has not yet been determined.

Built in 1907, St. Anne's Church was one of the oldest Anglican churches in Toronto. It was not only an architectural triumph, but also a rebel of its time.

Modelled after the Hagia Sophia, it was built in the Byzantine style, when the accepted style at the time was Gothic. In addition, the interior of St. Anne's was decorated by members of the famed Canadian Group of Seven artists.

St. Anne's, to our community, was more than a beautiful church. It was music. It was community. It was service.

My heart goes out to Reverend Don Beyers, the St. Anne's congregation and the entire community for this tragic loss. However, we know that after the darkest part of the night comes the light, and St. Anne's will rise bigger and better.

Carbon Pricing

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister's economic vandalism and carbon tax cover-up were exposed today. Following pressure from the common-sense Conservatives, the government has finally revealed the data showing the real cost of its carbon tax, in addition to the cost at the pump. It is $30 billion, or nearly $2,000 for every family in Quebec.

The government tried to destroy the reputation of the Parliamentary Budget Officer to hide this information. Why?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, as we here in the House already know, math is not the Conservative Party's strong suit, even less so for the Conservative Party leader. I know that he has a hard time counting higher than six, the number of affordable housing units he built when he was the housing minister.

The data proves it. I have it here. Eight out 10 families are receiving more from carbon pricing than they are paying. In addition, the Parliamentary Budget Officer confirmed that greenhouse gas emissions have been reduced by 25 million tonnes as a result of the implementation of carbon pricing.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, this minister hid the data proving that this is costing the Canadian economy $30 billion. The annual cost for Quebec is $5 billion, according to row 17, column AN. Yes, this is costing Quebeckers, and the Bloc Québécois is voting to increase this tax.

Why did the government try to destroy the Parliamentary Budget Officer's reputation when he was telling the truth?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, once again, he has proven just how ignorant the Conservative Party of Canada is when it comes to climate change, since federal carbon pricing does not apply in Quebec. Quebec has a system in place.

The Leader of the Opposition simply has to turn around, look three rows behind him and a little to his left. Then he will have the opportunity to talk to someone who voted in favour of carbon pricing in Quebec. All he has to do is ask her for an explanation. If she cannot give him one, I would be happy to.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the economic vandalism and carbon tax cover-up of the government has now been exposed because of relentless Conservative pressure. The government finally leaked out, to the CBC, the economic hit Canada will take, originally reported at $20 billion. With inflation, it is $30 billion a year, or almost $2,000 for every single family in Canada. The government tried to silence the Parliamentary Budget Officer on this.

How can we believe anything the Minister of Environment has to say on taxes?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague and friend, the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, often says in the House, members of the Conservative Party of Canada are entitled to their opinions, not their own sets of facts.

The facts are clear. Eight out of ten Canadian families get more money back from carbon pricing than it costs them. Not only that, but the data also shows that carbon pricing is already responsible for a reduction in the pollution level of 25 million tonnes. That is half of our emission reduction so far.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, those are not my numbers. Those are the minister's numbers. His own department released data moments ago showing that the real cost will be a $30-billion hit to our economy. This is above and beyond the direct cost at the pumps and in people's heating bills. When the Parliamentary Budget Officer said that, the minister denied it. He tried to gag the Parliamentary Budget Officer and shut him up completely.

Why did the minister try to hide the facts and punish a legitimate, hard-working public servant who tried to tell the truth?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I think we have established in the House that math is not the forte of the Leader of the Opposition. He has a hard time counting past six, which is the number of homes built through social housing when he was the minister responsible for housing.

However, the facts are clear: Eight out of ten Canadian families get more money back from carbon pricing than the pricing system costs. Not only that, but carbon pricing is responsible for half of our emission reduction. Because of carbon pricing, there is less pollution in the atmosphere in Canada by 25 million tonnes.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, that eight out of 10 fact does not include the $30 billion of economic costs; that is $2,000 of additional costs for every single family. When we exposed that, he denied it. When the Parliamentary Budget Officer reported on it, they attacked him and tried to gag him. The minister is not worth the economic vandalism. We cannot believe a word he says about taxes. He needs to resign.

When will the Prime Minister fire him?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I noted in the discussion yesterday that the Leader of the Opposition had a newfound respect for economists. However, I will tell him that 300 economists, in addition to the PBO, say eight out of 10 Canadians get more money back. The way it works is directly inverse to income. The Leader of the Opposition ignores the costs of climate change. Here are the facts: His climate plan is to let the planet burn. It is to ignore the economic opportunities associated with the energy transition. Look, this is a fellow who ran in the last campaign on putting in place a carbon price. Who is telling the truth?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

Order, please.

The hon. member for La Prairie.

Finance

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the supplementary estimates, this government wants to allocate $3.5 million for medals to mark the transition of the Crown in Canada to Charles III.

There was already $22 million budgeted for that. That is $22 million too many, but that was not enough for the Governor General. She wanted an extra 15% and this government said yes.

The Liberals have one last chance to wake up before the vote later on. Will they remove this budget item and avoid wasting millions of dollars on monarchist trinkets?

[Pascale St-Onge, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the Bloc Québécois is not really interested in this, but there are Canadians who are attached to our history and who want to recognize that our sovereign, who passed away, was the Queen of the Commonwealth for more than 70 years. When such a thing happens, it is a tradition in Canada for medals to be produced and distributed to those who are interested in such things.

We respect traditions. It is too bad for the Bloc Québécois. Most of its members have refused to allow their constituents to receive any medals.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what is truly despicable is that this additional $3.5 million for medals bearing the image of Charles III is part of the same estimates as the funding that has finally been released for clean drinking water for indigenous communities, which could have used the extra money. That is pathetic.

Frankly, considering that Quebeckers and even most Canadians want nothing more to do with the monarchy, there are a lot of people who think that this money would have been better used in indigenous communities.

Seriously, will the government withdraw that money from the estimates while there is still time?

[Pascale St-Onge, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, we see that the Bloc Québécois members are once again trying to stir up trouble with stories like this, when many people in their ridings would like to be able to mark the transition in the monarchy.

They will not be able to do so because the Bloc Québécois made an ideological decision to deprive its citizens of these medals, when they are being made available across Canada. That is really unfortunate for my Quebec friends.

Infrastructure

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, all the experts agree. Everyone agrees. The proposed third highway link is not a good idea. It is too expensive. It will pollute. All that to save five minutes' driving time.

We know that does not matter to the Bloc and the Conservatives, because they support it. For the NDP, however, it is a hard no. The viable, environmentally friendly and efficient solution is a tramway.

Can the Liberals guarantee that not a penny of public money will go to the third link and that investments will instead be made in green solutions for Quebec City, such as the tramway?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind my NDP colleague that this is a provincial matter. It is a provincial undertaking.

The Government of Canada has said that we will always be there for public transit projects. Why? Because that is the way of the future, contrary to the Conservative vision, which involves eliminating public transit projects. They do not believe in public transit. They do not believe in the fight against climate change. They will do absolutely nothing. Meanwhile, we will get on board with public transit projects.

Indigenous Affairs

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, for decades, Liberal and Conservative governments have ignored indigenous people's needs. As a result, the infrastructure gap is at billions of dollars. The Liberals committed to closing the gap by 2030, but they have committed less than 1%. This is just pennies.

Indigenous peoples deserve the same housing, roads and clean water as others. When will the Liberals follow through on their promises and close the gap so that indigenous peoples can thrive?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Indigenous Services and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member that this country has had a deplorable history of depriving indigenous communities of the things that they need to thrive.

In fact, since we have taken office, spending on indigenous infrastructure and priorities has increased by 185%. It speaks to the lack of effort by those Conservatives, when they were in government, to actually prioritize the needs of indigenous children. We will keep working to close that gap.

Carbon Pricing

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today, the government was forced to admit that the carbon tax will cost every single Canadian household more than $1,800 in lost GDP. They kept a $30-billion secret. Not once in anything ever released claiming that Canadians were somehow better off with the carbon tax did the minister include these devastating economic costs that he knew existed. It was more important for him to continue to spread the falsehood.

Canadians know they deserve a minister who will tell the truth. If he is incapable of that, when is he going to resign?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier in the House, it is great to see that the Conservative Party of Canada now actually believes that economists are thoughtful and give good advice. Three hundred of them signed a letter that told people eight out of 10 Canadian families do get more money back.

I would encourage my hon. colleague to read that letter. Certainly, I would say that, as we move forward, we must have a plan to address climate change, and we must do so in a manner that is affordable. That is exactly what carbon pricing does. That is something we will continue to do, balancing the environment and the economy, versus a party that actually has no plan for the environment whatsoever.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government gagged the Parliamentary Budget Officer that actually told Canadians the truth; it then cherry-picked portions of the data that support its version of the truth. This makes it look even more guilty.

If the Liberals truly believed that the carbon tax was helping, they would release the report. Instead, they kept a $30-billion secret from Canadians. The minister wanted to tell Canadians that, by paying more for gas, groceries and home heating, they would be better off, misleading them by about $30 billion. I do not know how he looks anyone in the face.

When will the Prime Minister actually fire him?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, it is beyond me how the Conservative Party of Canada and those members who campaigned to put in place a price on pollution can look anyone in the eyes. How can they look anyone in the eyes and say, “We are doing nothing to protect you against forest fires, we are doing nothing to protect you against hurricanes, and we are doing nothing to protect you against flooding”?

The Conservatives have no plan for the economy. They have no plan for climate change. They have no plan to work with communities to protect them from the devastating impacts of climate change.