Environment committee  As we've done at our bank since 1867, we're actively supporting the outcomes we all want for the future. We have a clear ambition and comprehensive disclosures, and we are making progress in helping clients transition their businesses to a low-carbon future. We acknowledge that there's more work to be done.

Carbon Pricing  Speaker, as my hon. colleague and friend, the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, often says in the House, members of the Conservative Party of Canada are entitled to their opinions, not their own sets of facts. The facts are clear. Eight out of ten Canadian families get more money back from carbon pricing than it costs them. Not only that, but the data also shows that carbon pricing is already responsible for a reduction in the pollution level of 25 million tonnes.

Carbon Pricing  He has a hard time counting past six, which is the number of homes built through social housing when he was the minister responsible for housing. However, the facts are clear: Eight out of ten Canadian families get more money back from carbon pricing than the pricing system costs. Not only that, but carbon pricing is responsible for half of our emission reduction.

Health committee  Now you've called another vote, and I just want to make sure I understand what I'm voting on. I'm not changing my vote, but you just called another vote, so I want to clear up which word is being used in English and which word is being used in French.

Health committee  Here's the amendment as subamended: She moved that the motion be amended by adding the words “and so were the majority of witnesses” after the words “by the task force’s guidelines” and by adding after the words “help save lives” the following: “that the Minister of Health direct the task force to go back to the drawing board and revisit the guidelines based on the latest science; and that the Public Health Agency of Canada table to this committee the parameters given to the task force to update breast cancer screening guidelines”. Are we clear on what we are voting on? That is the amendment as subamended. (Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 10; nays 0) We're now on the main motion as amended. Is there any debate on the motion?

Health committee  I don't have a clear sense of things. It doesn't appear that people are paying attention. We will conduct a recorded division on the subamendment. It is a tie, five-five. The chair votes in favour of the subamendment.

Health committee  I believe a very common-sense, reasonable proposal has been put forward by Ms. Zarrillo. It's clear that some members are looking to filibuster, but frankly, women's lives are on the line. I'm asking that we move to a vote so we can move forward on this very important topic for women and all Canadians.

Health committee  For the reasons I just gave, I feel perfectly comfortable making recommendations even though I'm not an expert. It's clear that it's the committee making these recommendations. We're obviously not the ones who will be making the decision. The government will.

Health committee  I support the amendment, and I agree in principle with what Mr. Thériault is saying. I want to make it clear, again, for the record, that I would love for us all to get a consensus to make this unanimous so we can express the urgency. I have no problem making noise. I have no problem with the urgency of this, but I think we have to respect the proper process.

Business of Supply  The strategy has been built on tapping into the fears and anxieties of Canadians and trying to put the blame on the federal government. Their strategy has been very clear on the carbon tax. It is a communications success, from my perspective. They have done a really good job at communicating a false narrative to Canadians. That false narrative being that the carbon tax does not work and it affects everybody in a negative way.

Finance committee  In the motion, we said we had until Friday, this week, to send in our witness list. I want to make it clear that the session on this study next week will be with the witnesses we invite, not with departmental officials. We will invite the latter to appear when we have the text of the bill.

Finance committee  I'm just trying to get everything clear here.

Health committee  I'm just throwing this out there because we haven't had time to fully consider the whole thing. I wonder if there's an appetite for amending the motion. I haven't even cleared this with my own party, but I'm suggesting there might be an appetite for this wording: That, given that the federally created Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care decided not to lower the breast cancer screening age guidelines, and that, Breast Cancer Canada said it was “deeply concerned” by the task force's guidelines, the committee report to the House that the decision by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care should be immediately reconsidered and that consideration be given to extending breast cancer screening to women in their 40s....

Business of Supply  They are poorer. The GDP reduction proves that this is harmful to the economy, and the PBO has been clear all along that the economic cost of the carbon tax does not make Canadians wealthier.

Finance committee  Okay. Are all members clear on that? Yes. Does everyone understand?