Ed Fast

[The Environment, November 17th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to ask a few questions of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change.

In October of this year, the Prime Minister announced that he would be imposing a massive carbon tax grab on Canadians. This tax, by the year 2022, will require Canadians to pay about $50 per tonne of C0₂ emissions. That is billions of dollars coming out of the pockets of taxpayers.

The Prime Minister did this without the support of the provinces. Many of them have lamented the fact that this is absolutely the worst time to hammer Canadians with a carbon tax, given our floundering economy. Canadians will be saddled with billions of dollars of extra taxes a year. They would have the right to assume that at the very least, prior to imposing such a heavy tax burden on Canadians, the government would actually do a cost benefit impact analysis, in other words an economic impact analysis on what this tax would mean for the Canadian economy and the damage it could cause.

I was certainly pleased to hear the minister was making one of her assistant deputy ministers available for a briefing. We came to that briefing and we asked whether a full impact analysis of the carbon tax had been done. We were shocked to hear him say that not only had no cost benefit impact analysis been done, but it was the view of the assistant deputy minister and the minister herself that such an impact analysis was premature.

With that in mind, on November 1, I asked the minister in the House whether it was true that an impact analysis had not done on the carbon tax. Sadly, the minister did not answer the question and instead fell back on her bland talking points. She certainly could not provide any answers on how the national carbon tax would impact ordinary Canadians. This is what she actually said. In order to tackle climate change, a carbon tax “is also the way to grow our economy, create good jobs, and ensure a sustainable future for our children.”

Canadians will be very surprised to hear the Liberal government says that the way to grow the economy is to tax the daylights out of Canadians. Canadians will be shocked to hear that.

If the minister is so sure that additional taxes will spur economic growth, where is the government's modelling that proves that?

I have three questions for the parliamentary secretary. In the interests of transparency and open government, which is what the Prime Minister promised when he was running for election, I would ask that he please answer the questions directly.

First, is it true that the government announced its massive carbon tax grab without ever doing an impact analysis on what that tax would mean for ordinary Canadians?

Second, if that is so, could the parliamentary secretary tell us exactly how much additional government revenue is expected to be raised from the carbon tax once it is fully implemented in 2022?

Finally, could the parliamentary secretary tell the House why the government plans to raise taxes on Canadians at a time when our economy is floundering?

[The Environment, November 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, she should be listening to real Canadians and real job creators. Here is what the Nova Scotia Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters had to say: “With half the [carbon tax] cost being incurred by businesses, this will definitely negatively impact competitiveness and an already fragile economy”.

To the Prime Minister, why a harmful carbon tax, why the disdain for job creators, and why the betrayal of provinces like Nova Scotia, which already leads Canada with clean electricity?

[The Environment, November 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, in October, the Prime Minister unilaterally announced a massive carbon tax grab on Canadians. He perversely claimed that Canadians would benefit economically from this new tax, but we recently learned from the assistant deputy minister for environment that an economic impact analysis has never been done and that the Liberals believe such an assessment was premature. Did he say premature? The Prime Minister just hammered Canadians with a punishing carbon tax, and his officials say an impact analysis is premature.

When will the Prime Minister finally tell us how badly this carbon tax will hurt Canadians?

[International Trade, November 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the government on signing the Canada-Europe free trade agreement.

That event is the culmination of many years of hard work by our previous Conservative government under Stephen Harper. The agreement sets the gold standard for the world, the most comprehensive trade agreement ever signed. I give many thanks to the chief negotiators, Steve Verheul and Ana Renart; my chiefs of staff, Bill Hawkins and Andrea van Vugt; the MPs for Battlefords-Lloydminster and Durham; and my parliamentary secretary, Gerald Keddy.

However, it is too early to break out the champagne. Sunday's ceremony was just another step towards ratification. It now appears that a number of key outcomes are at risk. An uncertain fate awaits investor-state dispute settlement, and what concessions did the trade minister make on agricultural safeguards? Why will regional governments now have vetoes? Why is the government not delivering promised compensation?

Until the agreement is in force, we will continue to hold the Liberal government's feet to the fire to ensure that the gold standard we achieved does not lose its lustre.

[Ethics, October 20th, 2016]

How much did you have to pay?

[Business of Supply, October 17th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Cariboo—Prince George for making such a compelling, powerful argument in favour of getting a deal with the United States on softwood lumber. The last time we had this kind of chaos within the forestry industry in Canada was under the former Liberal government of Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien. It was chaotic. It was a war in the woods, as it was called. It took a Conservative government to resolve it.

More recently, we have a Liberal government that claims that it had a framework agreement with the United States outlined, but nothing was delivered.

Would my colleague spell out what he has seen from the Liberal government to respond to the promise it made that there would be a clear framework to get this resolved within 90 days of the meeting between President Obama and prime minister Harper last March?

[Business of Supply, October 17th, 2016]

BFF.

[Business of Supply, October 17th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the minister's words. However, she talked about how many meetings the government has had. Really, what the workers in the forestry industry are looking for are not meetings. They are looking for a quality of outcome that resolves this issue.

Members may recall that back in 2006, when our previous Conservative government was elected, we followed on decades of neglect by the previous government under Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien. They just could not get it done. They could not negotiate an agreement.

Within months of our government being elected, guess what happened. We were able to resolve the softwood lumber dispute. We brought this country nine years of peace.

The current Liberal government has had one year to get this done. It has not.

Do members remember, in Washington, D.C., when the President of the United States and our Prime Minister agreed that within 90 days they would have a framework for resolving this agreement? Where is that framework agreement? Why is the minister not getting it done?

[Points of Order, October 6th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a note that we reluctantly raise in this House.

There is a lot of back and forth that takes place in this House. Most of it, as we know, is good-natured. When the Speaker was on the benches here, he also engaged in that sometimes. We all do it. As long as it is good-natured, of course, we accept that. It adds energy to this House.

However, today we were obviously gobsmacked when one of our members made a gesture that was offensive. Just to give some context, one of our Conservative members raised the issue of the Azer children, who were abducted by their father and taken to Iran against their will and against the will of their mother, Mrs. Azer.

Our member asked a perfectly legitimate question about what the foreign affairs minister was doing to ensure that those children are returned to their mother, Mrs. Azer, here in Canada.

Those of us on this side of the House were absolutely horrified to see the foreign affairs minister, in response to that question, use a gesture like this. We can imagine how Mrs. Azer would have reacted when she saw that gesture.

Given the fact that these children are still being held captive in Iran by their father, this is a gesture that truly was offensive, not only to this House but to this family.

My question to the minister, and a suggestion, is whether the foreign affairs minister will now stand up in this House, assure this House that he will have greater respect for you, the members of this House, and the Azer family in the future, and do the right thing and apologize for using such an inappropriate gesture.

The foreign affairs minister had the opportunity to stand up once in this House to apologize. He chose not to. In the alternative, if he does not, I would ask that you review the film and take whatever actions are appropriate to ensure that we restore order in this House.

[Taxation, October 6th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the Liberals who are out of touch with ordinary working Canadians, we understand that a massive carbon tax grab will not help the environment. It will only hurt the most vulnerable.

My friend Glen is 65 years old and cannot afford to retire. He does not know how much he will pay for his rent, for his groceries, and the heating bill as a result of this massive carbon tax grab.

So again I will ask for a straight answer. How much will this massive tax grab cost Glen and other Canadians when a carbon tax is levied of $50 a tonne?