Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 14 of 14
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2019-05-14 16:29
Expand
Thank you, witnesses, for your presentation here today.
I've got more questions than time. I will start with one question.
Earlier today I was able to meet with the Mining Association of Canada. One of their concerns was a Liberal fuel standard that's being proposed. You mentioned earlier in your presentation that from a tax perspective we are very competitive with our major competition, the United States. They don't have a carbon tax. When you consider the carbon tax and a proposed Liberal fuel standard that could amount to anywhere from $150 to $400 per tonne of carbon, how will that position us competitively?
Collapse
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2019-04-30 16:45
Expand
Okay. Very good.
The carbon tax was implemented in my province recently. I saw just over a 4.5¢ per litre increase on the price of gas, and just over 5¢ per litre on the price of diesel fuel. Do you have projected revenues on what that will bring in?
Collapse
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2019-04-30 16:45
Expand
So your department hasn't been tasked at all with calculating the amount of fuel that's going to be burned. You have not been involved in that at all.
Collapse
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2019-04-30 16:46
Expand
Okay. Can you give me the volumes, then, of fuel that you expect to be taxed with this carbon tax, either gasoline or diesel? Have you done that calculation?
Collapse
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
First of all, we are deeply disappointed in the decision that General Motors has taken. Our line of communication to the company is open to look at possibilities of making that plant continuously viable. Minister Bains has said that publicly. We continue to believe that an ongoing conversation with the company is important, and we make that offer.
On the issue of a price on pollution, if someone is trying to make a link between a price on pollution and the closure of the Oshawa plant, then they're going to have to address the closure of three American plants at the same time.
Collapse
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
There is a schedule of the pan-Canadian framework decision on the price of pollution. It's $10, $20, $30, leading to $50 a tonne by...2023?
Collapse
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2018-11-01 12:24
Expand
Would it make any sense that exactly those industrial emitters are getting the biggest break when it comes to the carbon tax?
Collapse
View Robert Sopuck Profile
CPC (MB)
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Again, I think that the made-in-Manitoba climate change and green plan was done after your report, but I would recommend that you have a look at it because it's probably the most comprehensive response to climate change in Canada. What I like about that particular plan is that it has a lot of on-the-ground programming built in.
I think Mr. Bossio alluded to the importance of on-the-ground programming, with things like carbon sequestration, land management, and so on.
On page 6, you talked about carbon pricing as the economic mechanism intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, so my assumption is that either a cap-and-trade system or a carbon tax is something that you generally support.
Collapse
View Robert Sopuck Profile
CPC (MB)
Right. Well, I still take it to mean that you're probably supportive of a price on carbon, but—
My question is—and I asked the environment minister this and was very disappointed by the answer I didn't get—under the $50 carbon tax being proposed by this government, and given that your report is all about measure, measure, measure, and how are we doing and how quickly are we getting there.... Well, the “there” is a number, so what I am looking for are numbers and so far I'm not getting them.
Under the $50 carbon tax, can you give us the number that indicates how much greenhouse gas emissions in Canada will be reduced when that tax is implemented across Canada?
Collapse
View Robert Sopuck Profile
CPC (MB)
Well, it seems that nobody has, and again, this is casting no aspersions on you or your office, given the role you play. You basically analyze what you're given, and that's the role of your office. However, the fact that there is no number attached to carbon pricing, in terms of reduced emissions, I find absolutely shocking.
In my own career in environmental management, it's a truism that every environmental action or decision should have a measurable environmental result that you can look at and count. In this particular case, in terms of a carbon tax or a carbon price, in terms of an actual number, in terms of reduced emissions, we don't seem to have it. I find that absolutely astonishing.
I will now turn the rest of my time over to Monsieur Godin.
Collapse
View James Bezan Profile
CPC (MB)
I'll move my last motion, from November 25:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee conduct a study of the Federally Mandated Carbon Tax and its effects on the Canadian Armed Forces, especially on the budget and spending items; and that the Committee report its findings and recommendations to the House of Commons no later than Thursday, April 13, 2017.
I'll speak to that now, or do you want to adjourn debate?
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Collapse
View James Bezan Profile
CPC (MB)
Let me finish first before we start going into this.
Mr. Chair, since I have the floor, I'll just speak on this. Even though in the defence policy book that was tabled this week, they did talk about exempting the fleets of military vehicles, ships, and planes from having to fit under the criteria of carbon emission reduction, it doesn't change the fact that all of our bases, all our planes, all our army equipment, all of our ships—the navy, army, and air force—still all have to pay carbon taxation. Wherever they buy their fuel, those jurisdictions have carbon taxes. Whether it's B.C., whether it's Nova Scotia, whether it's anywhere else across the country, there will be a mandated carbon tax brought into play in each and every one of those jurisdictions.
There is a cost associated with that. Just with some quick numbers, because we did some access to information requests as well as questions on the order paper based upon...and we went province by province right through. I can tell you that based upon the value of gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, and natural gas that's used for heating buildings as well as propane, especially in some of our remote bases where they use propane to heat buildings, it looks like the navy could be looking at anywhere from $13 to $19 million; the army between $8 and $10 million in extra costs; and the air force between $191 million and $245 million. That is significant, and it all would increase the price of fuel. That in itself could be as high as a $275 million cost to the armed forces, in terms of the difference between what these fuels cost now and what they will cost in the future.
It's $6.5 million—yes, I read that wrong. It's a $6.5 million total cost to the entire Canadian Forces.
Collapse
Results: 1 - 14 of 14

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data