House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2019, with 49% of the vote.
Carbon Pricing February 5th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I will speak directly to Canadians. We are putting a price on pollution and we are giving all the money back. The party opposite knows that. They like spreading misinformation.
For a family of four in Ontario, we have a price on pollution and a family will receive $307. That is more than eight out of 10 families paid. They can save more money if they invest in energy efficiency.
The party opposite has no plan for the environment and no plan for the economy.
Carbon Pricing February 5th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, in Quebec, we have all-party support to put a price on pollution. Only the Conservative Party here thinks that polluting should be free.
We have a plan to reduce pollution, invest in good jobs and grow our economy. We will continue to do so.
What is the Conservatives’ plan to fight climate change?
Carbon Pricing February 1st, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to talk about the truth, but let us be clear: action on climate change is not a gimmick. We need to take action on climate change and we need to do it in an affordable way.
I wish the party opposite would stop misleading Canadians. We can put a price on pollution. We can reduce emissions and we can foster innovation and clean solutions and make life affordable by giving money back. Economists show it. The province of B.C. shows it. If we talk to Canadians, they tell us they want a serious plan to tackle climate change and they want us to make life affordable, and we are doing both.
Carbon Pricing February 1st, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I would like to say directly to the residents in the member's riding that we are committed to making life affordable. That is why we increased tax on the 1%: so we could reduce it on the middle class. That is why we increased the Canada child benefit: so more families in his riding will have more money and we can raise kids out of poverty. That is why we are also taking action to put a price on pollution, and giving more money back to families so life will be affordable while we tackle the biggest challenge of our generation.
The big question is this. Why does the party opposite not understand that the environment and the economy go together—that we need to tackle climate change and do it in an affordable way?
Carbon Pricing February 1st, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to stand up and talk about how we are putting a price on pollution in an affordable way. A family of four in Ontario will get $307 back, which is more than 810 families pay. We are concerned about affordability.
The Conservative Party, unfortunately, is not. The Conservatives voted against the Canada child benefit. They voted against increasing taxes on the 1% and decreasing them on the middle class. They voted against putting a price on pollution; they believe it should be free to pollute.
We are going to continue to take action that makes life affordable and also take action on climate change.
Carbon Pricing January 29th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, once again, the misinformation that is being spread by Conservative politicians, from Premier Ford to the leader of the opposition, is appalling. In fact, I am happy to point to the legislation that we passed, which the Conservatives voted against because they wanted to be free to pollute. It shows that we are giving all the money back. Guess what. A family of four in Ontario will get $307 more than they will pay.
We are focused on making life affordable. We are also focused on protecting the environment. The party opposite wants to take us back to the Harper days when the Conservatives did not protect—
Carbon Pricing January 29th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, it is really unfortunate that Conservative politicians continue to peddle misinformation. We have been clear that we are going to tackle climate change. We are going to do it in a way that it is effective and also affordable.
I am very proud to tell the member opposite that a family of four will get $307 in Ontario more than they will pay. That has been our approach.
However, the question is this. Does the party opposite understand that climate inaction is a huge cost and that the Conservatives are passing that cost to their kids, that climate change is real and that Canadians deserve a plan?
We are going to continue moving forward on our plan to make—
Questions on the Order Paper January 28th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, Environment and Climate Change Canada does not have specific coding to track information related to Question Q-2144.
Questions on the Order Paper January 28th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, the federal carbon pollution pricing system has two parts: a regulatory charge on fuel, or federal fuel charge, and a regulatory trading system for large industry--the output-based pricing system. The output-based pricing system is designed to ensure there is a price incentive for companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining competitiveness and protecting against carbon leakage. Instead of paying the charge on fuels that they purchase, facilities in the output-based pricing system will be subject to the carbon pollution price on a portion of their emissions. The portion of emissions will be determined based on a facility’s production and relevant output-based standards, expressed in emissions intensity—i.e., emissions per unit of output.
In July 2018, the government proposed that the starting point for all output-based standards be set at 80% of national sector average emissions intensity and that consideration be given to revising this level based on a three-phased approach to assessing competitiveness and carbon leakage risk to sectors from carbon pollution pricing.
Phase 1 and 2 analysis is quantitative analysis of the level of emission intensity and trade exposure of industrial sectors. The analysis is similar to that used in other jurisdictions to assess the risks posed by carbon pricing to competitiveness and carbon leakage for industrial sector.
Phase 3 analysis focuses on the ability to pass through costs from carbon pollution pricing; domestic or international market considerations that could heighten competitiveness risks due to carbon pollution pricing; consideration of indirect costs from transportation and electricity; and other specific considerations related to carbon pollution pricing that could affect the sector as a whole, a particular region within that sector, or individual facilities.
To support phase 3, stakeholders were invited to submit additional information and analyses relevant to competitiveness impacts of carbon pollution pricing. Environment and Climate change Canada officials engaged with stakeholders through in-person meetings and conference calls and reviewed submissions from stakeholders. Analysis was conducted based on publicly available data as well as stakeholder submissions that provided sector and facility-level data and information.
To date, the government has identified five sectors as being at higher competitiveness and carbon leakage risk due to carbon pollution pricing and output-based standards. They are: cement, iron and steel manufacturing, lime, petrochemicals and nitrogen fertilizers. Proposed output-based standards for these sectors are set at 90% of sector average emissions intensity for iron and steel manufacturing, petrochemicals and nitrogen fertilizers, and 95% for cement and lime. Draft regulations for the output-based pricing system, including output-based standards that will reflect the outcomes of the three-phase analysis, were released for public comment on December 20, 2018 and are available at https:// www.canada.ca/en/environment- climate-change/services /climate-change/pricing- pollution-how -it-will-work/output -based-pricing-system /proposal- regulations.html. Final regulations and final output-based standards are targeted for mid-2019.
Carbon Pricing January 28th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, farmers are feeling the impacts of climate change and they are paying the price. Business people are feeling the impacts of climate change and they are paying the price. Soccer moms are feeling the impacts of climate change and they are paying the price. That is why we have a plan that if works is going to make life more affordable, is going to put more money in the pockets of families and is going to create good jobs.
We need to take action on climate change. To not have a plan is irresponsible. It has now been 274 days since the party opposite said that it would have a plan. Where is its climate plan?