Catherine McKenna

[Carbon Pricing, May 9th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we have done to make life more affordable. We have increased taxes on the 1% so we can reduce them on the middle class. We brought in the Canada child benefit—

[Carbon Pricing, May 9th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, why does the party opposite not care about climate change? Climate change is real. It is having an impact.

In British Columbia, there were forest fires that were burning stronger and longer than ever before. There were mothers who were talking to me about being worried about their kids going outside because the air quality index was 10 or dangerous. There were people who were being hit in the tourism industry, because people were worried about the forest fires and the impacts.

We need to take action on climate change. There is a real cost. The environment and the economy do go together in the 21st century. I wish the party opposite would understand that.

[Carbon Pricing, May 9th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. We have not put a price on pollution in B.C., because B.C. has stepped up. B.C.'s gas price has gone up by one cent because of its carbon price.

The party opposite does not seem to understand that everyone is paying the cost of climate change. In Ottawa, in the national capital region, we have seen massive flooding that is impacting people's lives and people's property. It is just going to get worse. Our climate change report says that Canada is warming at twice the global average.

We need to take action on climate change. Why will the party opposite not join us?

[Carbon Pricing, May 9th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I apologize for that.

The party opposite is misleading Canadians. Instead of actually talking about the cost of climate change to Canadians, which has gone from $400 million to over $2 billion per year that everyone is paying for right now, instead of talking about the money that Canadians are getting back, with a family of four in Ontario getting a climate action incentive rebate of $307, Conservatives are misleading them because Conservatives do not want to take serious climate action. They do not believe that climate change is the problem. They want to do—

[Carbon Pricing, May 9th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the party opposite voted for the Paris Agreement and for standing up and taking action on climate change. What are those members doing now? They are lying to Canadians. They are not saying to Canadians that—

[The Environment, May 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I was at the G7 meeting in France, where we talked about how we need to take more action on climate, how we need to take action on nature and how we need to do it in an affordable way while creating good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing.

We are putting a price on pollution, giving the money back, such that a family of four in Ontario receives $307. We are tackling our biodiversity challenge and protecting nature by doubling the amount of nature that we protect in Canada. We know that we need to tackle climate change. We need to protect more nature. We need to do it in a way that creates good jobs and grows our economy.

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 6th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, as of April 23, 2019, Environment and Climate Change Canada has not yet incurred expenditures related to Q-2341.

[Natural Resources, May 2nd, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, no, we will not kill Bill C-69. It is in the Senate. I was very pleased to testify today to talk about the importance of Bill C-69. Unfortunately, under the previous environmental assessment regime brought in by the Conservatives in an omnibus budget bill, the Conservatives gutted environmental protections and good projects cannot go ahead in a timely way because they all end up in court.

We know we need a better system and better rules to develop our resources in a way that protects the environment, that has proper consultation and accommodation with indigenous peoples and that ensures good projects go ahead.

We will continue to move forward and work with senators.

[The Environment, May 2nd, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. Fifty-four proposals were selected through a fair, transparent and rigorous process. There is absolutely no truth in what the party opposite is saying.

What Canadians want to know is why the party opposite will not consent to have the Parliamentary Budget Officer cost its platform. We want to know how much it is going to cost or how much the cuts are going to cost Canadians.

[Government Priorities, April 12th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, no. The reason Loblaws got this deal was that there was an open tender process that was open to businesses, communities, big businesses, small businesses and indigenous peoples. There were 54 winners. It was based on emissions reductions. In this case, in this open and transparent process run by public servants, we are only putting up one-quarter of the amount of the $48 million. That reduction in emissions is like 50,000 vehicles off the road. We should all support that. We should all be looking to work together to tackle climate change.