Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, we do not have to go through a stunt like the Conservatives are going to pull because we have already answered the question. Eighty per cent of Canadians live in a province where the province has decided what to do with the revenues. The revenues have gone back in

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, once again, I refer to the April 30 document that provides the information. However, let us talk about what we have done. We have created historic numbers of jobs for Canadians. We have the lowest unemployment rate in generations. We cut taxes on the middle class an

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, we believe in Canadians' right to legal, peaceful protests.

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, I am going to keep on saying the same thing. We published a report on April 30. I am happy to personally give it to the member opposite. What does it say? It says that pricing pollution works. It says that it reduces emissions by 80 million to 90 million tonnes and t

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, I am going to talk to Canadians. You should go to provinces and ask what provinces are going to do with the revenue. There is a lot of misinformation here, misinformation from the other side. All revenues will stay in the province and the provinces can give back the

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, we published a report on April 30 doing exactly that. It talks about pricing pollution. It talks about the 80 million to 90 million tonnes, the equivalent of taking 25 million cars off the road, that pricing achieves. We believe provinces are best placed to decide wh

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, I do not know how much clearer I can be. All revenues from pricing go back to the provinces. It is up to provinces to decide what to do. Let us talk about the economy. Let us talk about the 600,000 jobs that our government created with Canadians. Let us talk about t

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, our government believes in the right of peaceful protest.

Impact Assessment Act  Mr. Speaker, we are doing what the previous government was unable to do, which is get a pipeline built to tidewater. We need to ensure we have a process that is robust, a process that makes decisions based on science, fact, and evidence. What is our ideology? It is that facts an

Impact Assessment Act  Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with the member opposite that we need to make decisions based on science and we need to look at climate impacts. When we came into office, the first thing we did in January 2016 was introduce interim principles. What did those interim principles s

Impact Assessment Act  Mr. Speaker, I am always surprised when I hear the other side talking about politicizing processes. That is why we are here. Canadians allot trust in the way we do environmental assessments because of the previous government. Through CEAA, 2012, it gutted the process. It did not

Impact Assessment Act  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I want to clarify that we have a process to determine which projects will be assessed. Now we have a process for the list of projects. We have a regulatory process to evaluate what factors we should look at to determine what pr

Impact Assessment Act  Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat my thanks to the members of the committee. I know they worked extremely hard. They went through a large number of amendments and they accepted amendments. That is the way to do things. We listen, and if we can do things better, then that is gre

Impact Assessment Act  moved that Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, be read the third time and passed. Madam Speaker, before I begin, I wish to acknowle

The Environment  Mr. Speaker, we agree that we need to grow our economy. We need to create good jobs with Canadians, and we also need to tackle climate change. That is exactly what we have been doing. We have been making historic investments in clean technologies, and I would like to give a sho