Catherine McKenna

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the reason we are putting a price on emissions and on pollution is because we want to grow our economy. That is why we have job creators, major energy companies, the five big banks, and consumer companies saying to actually do this, because it will help us reduce emissions and innovate. Innovation is a good thing. I hope the member opposite believes that, because innovation is necessary so that we position ourselves well to have clean solutions that we can then export, and grow our economy.

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised to see that the opposition party is concerned about the middle class, because that party certainly did not support our tax cuts for the middle class.

We are working with the provinces and the territories. I will again quote the Premier of Quebec, Philippe Couillard:

We believe it's good [carbon pricing], and it's not going to affect the functioning of our trading system. It puts everyone on the same course, in a strong position to combat climate change.

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, if the member opposite was so concerned about seniors living on fixed incomes, then he should have supported reducing the age of old age security to 65.

We also brought in a tax cut for the middle class. We brought in an enhanced Canada child benefit.

Let us be clear: the revenues from any price on pollution go back to the provinces. The provinces can do what B.C. is doing, giving tax cuts to families and also giving money back to small businesses.

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I was actually born in Hamilton, so I know that area very well.

I would just like to be clear that this is about growing the economy, and it is about protecting our environment. Unfortunately, the party opposite does not understand that that is the direction we need to go. Provinces are entitled to determine what system works for them and what to do with the revenues.

We have the support of business, job creators, because they understand that this is the way we are going to grow our economy, we are going to create good jobs, and we are going to create export opportunities for Canadian businesses to create more wealth for the middle class.

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, part of my portfolio is to constantly think about future generations. That is why we have to ensure that we have a cleaner economy. We need good jobs and we must protect our environment. That is what we are doing.

I will quote the Premier of Quebec who said, “We believe it's good [carbon pricing], and it's not going to affect the functioning of our trading system. It puts everyone on the same course, in a strong position to combat climate change”.

I hope the party across the way will—

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to congratulate my colleague on becoming a grandfather.

As a mother of three, I know that we need to take a cleaner approach to growing our economy. We also have to tackle climate change. That is what we are doing. We are putting a price on carbon, because that solution uses market forces to lower emissions and grow a cleaner economy. We are doing this for my children and for my colleague's grandchildren.

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, let me get this straight. The member opposite is criticizing companies that are actually supporting putting a price on pollution. These companies created 900,000 jobs and $400 billion in revenue, and they get it. The environment and the economy go together. We need to reduce emissions while moving to a clean-growth economy.

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I always find it surprising that the party opposite would be against a market measure that is supported by businesses across Canada.

Let me get this straight. We now have Canadian companies, like Suncor and Shell, job creators that are supporting putting a price on pollution—

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, if the member opposite and the party opposite is so concerned about the middle class, I wonder why they did not support our middle-class tax cut and why they did not support an enhancement to the Canada child benefit, which now helps nine out of 10 Canadian families and raises over 300,00 children out of poverty.

Let us be clear about pricing pollution. Any revenue raised from pricing pollution would remain in the province. Provinces could do as British Columbia has done: growing its economy while returning revenues in the form of tax cuts to small businesses and to families.

This is the way we are moving forward to grow our economy and to protect the environment. I wish the other party would join us.

[Taxation, October 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I am really confused. I do not see how my colleague can say the Conservative Party supports the Paris agreement when he voted against it.

We know that the economy and the environment go hand in hand. That is why we are pricing carbon. In fact, 80% of Canadians, including Quebeckers, already pay a carbon price. The Premier of Quebec supports our position. We are working with the provinces and territories because we are taking this seriously, because we want to grow our economy, a clean economy, and because—