Guy Caron

[Natural Resources, June 6th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians he would be a climate change leader, and he committed to eliminate public subsidies for oil and gas companies.

However, climate change leaders do not buy pipelines with public money. Climate change leaders do not allow $3 million bonuses to be given to top oil executives. Climate change leaders do use public money to build long-term job creation in renewable energies.

Could the government explain why it makes sense for a climate change leader to buy a pipeline?

[Carmel Moreault, June 6th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, on May 1 at 7:15 p.m., Carmel Moreault, a firefighter from Témiscouata-sur-le-Lac had just finished dinner with his partner when he got a call about an alarm at the Cascades plant. At 8 p.m., he texted his partner telling her not to wait up because there was a fire.

Fifteen minutes later, she received a call from the station chief informing her that Carmel had had an accident. The sprinkler system had filled a ventilation pipe with water, and he was crushed by the pipe. Carmel Moreault did not survive. He was the first firefighter from Témiscouata-sur-le-Lac to die in the line of duty.

I saw so much love from his community at his funeral. More than 250 firefighters from Quebec and New Brunswick were there to show their solidarity and pay tribute to him one last time.

I want to offer my sincere condolences to his family, and in particular his partner, Sylvie, his children, the mother of his children, and his mother, Lucienne, as well as his colleagues from stations 35 and 36 in Témiscouata-sur-le-Lac.

This tribute pales in comparison to the sacrifice Carmel made for his community.

[Natural Resources, May 30th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, we are the ones talking about energy and the environment and they are the ones abandoning the environment for the economy. That is clear. The other thing that is clear is that the Premier of Alberta keeps her promises. We really take issue with the government breaking the promises it made to Canadians.

The Liberals do not seem to realize that they have decided to take on a risk that Kinder Morgan clearly no longer wanted to bear. Let us be clear: what the government bought for $4.5 billion is a pipeline that was built in the 1950s. Expanding the pipeline will take an additional $7-billion to $15-billion investment.

Can the government tell us what fiscal impact this nationalization will have on Canadian taxpayers?

[Natural Resources, May 30th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, it would be good if the Prime Minister would put as much passion into talking about the environment as he has talking about buying a pipeline.

Let's not kid ourselves. By deciding to invest $4.5 billion of taxpayers' money in the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the government is nationalizing it. Champions of the environment do not buy pipelines. Champions of the environment do not choose to make taxpayers assume the financial and environmental risks associated with a pipeline. Champions of the environment invest in clean energy.

What risk assessments did the government conduct before getting out its chequebook for Kinder Morgan?

[Natural Resources, May 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, what is clear in the minister's response is that we are the ones talking about energy and the environment and they are the ones abandoning the environment for the economy.

The government is going to invest $4.5 billion in a pipeline. In comparison, in 2016, only $3 billion of public and private money was invested in clean energy. Countries that take the impact of climate change seriously do not build themselves pipelines. Reconciling the environment and energy means investing in clean energy.

Why are the Liberals bent on investing in fossil fuels?

[Natural Resources, May 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the government is going to spend $4.5 billion of taxpayers' money to nationalize a pipeline, $4.5 billion of public money to assume all the risk. This from a government that promised to get rid of subsidies for the oil and gas industry.

Why are the Liberals insisting on investing so much in fossil fuels and so little in renewable energy?

[Natural Resources, May 28th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, what the Prime Minister is saying is that he is not overly concerned that a company could be making $164 million in profit without paying a cent in taxes.

In fact, the problem goes deeper than that, because over the past three years, the total net revenue declared by Kinder Morgan was more than $340 million. Can anyone guess how much tax it actually paid on those profits? Over three years, the company paid $1.1 million in taxes.

I will repeat my question: why would it be in the national interest to give a blank cheque for $500 million, $1 billion, or $2 billion to a company like Kinder Morgan Canada, which has the means, and certainly the motivation, to avoid paying taxes in this country?

[Natural Resources, May 28th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, in 2017, Kinder Morgan Canada reported $164 million in net revenue and should have paid $64 million in taxes. However, that did not happen. Ultimately, this company took advantage of all loopholes and did not pay a cent in taxes. Zero.

In light of that, can the Prime Minister explain why it would be in the national interest to give a blank cheque for $500 million, or $1 billion, or $5 billion to a company like Kinder Morgan Canada, which has the means, and certainly the motivation, to avoid paying its fair share of taxes?

[Natural Resources, May 23rd, 2018]

Words, Mr. Speaker, just words.

The truth is that the Liberals have no intention of cutting off oil and gas subsidies and no plan to do so. The truth is that they now want to subsidize Kinder Morgan. How much will that cost? The government says it cannot answer that question because it does not negotiate in public.

News flash: when they announce that they are going to subsidize a company like Kinder Morgan or some other company that wants to take over the project, that is negotiating in public.

What is it going to be? $500 million? $1 billion? $5 billion? Does the government have a cap in mind for the Kinder Morgan subsidy?

[Natural Resources, May 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, page 40 of the Liberals' 2015 election platform reads, and I quote:

We will fulfill our G20 commitment and phase out subsidies for the fossil fuel industry over the medium-term.

Not only does the government not have a plan to eliminate those subsidies, but now it also wants to give Kinder Morgan a blank cheque.

Does the government intend to keep its promise and eliminate subsidies for the oil and gas industry?