Conservative Leader Calls Out Trudeau Right to His Face, Parliament Goes Wild: 'High-Carbon Hypocrisy'
Politicians around the world trying to make decisions about climate change could learn a thing or two from Pierre Poilievre, the leader of the Canadian Conservative Party, who just went toe-to-toe with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
In a sparring match between Poilievre and the prime minister, Poilievre soundly rebutted Trudeau’s increased tax on carbon emissions, pointing out the untenability of such a tax plan and Trudeau’s own hypocrisy in fighting climate change, but also frequently flying on his private jet.
Last year Trudeau announced that he would be increasing the carbon emission tax in Canada beginning on April 1, 2022, the Toronto Sun reported.
The new tax would be $50 per ton of emissions, which was a 25 percent increase from 2021’s $40 per ton tax. Trudeau plans to keep raising that tax through 2030, the according to the Sun.
But Poilievre has spoken out against this tax, claiming that it doesn’t work and it’s just Trudeau’s way of funding his government without actually doing anything about climate change.
“His carbon tax has not hit a single, solitary emissions reduction target. It has not worked,” Poilievre said during a parliamentary session.
“In the month of July, when this family was paying $12,645 in his carbon tax, supposedly for the environment, the prime minister jumped on his private jet 20 times. High carbon hypocrisy. He can’t tell us how much the tax will cost. Will he tell us how much carbon he emitted in that month of July?” Poilievre said.
Poilievre’s comments were met with cheers and clapping.
.@PierrePoilievre calls @JustinTrudeau a hypocrite to his face for his 20 private jet trips in a single month.
“Will he tell us how much carbon he emitted in that month of July?!” pic.twitter.com/QFHgw7KUDL
— Young Americans for Liberty (@YALiberty) October 5, 2022
Trudeau responded, not with an argument about how the tax plan works, but by essentially pointing out that climate change is real, thus implying that Poilievre was a climate-change denier.
But that is not what Poilievre’s comments addressed.
Poilievre shot back that this was a tax, not a climate change plan, that Trudeau was defending.
“The prime minister hasn’t gotten serious on climate change. He has a tax plan, not a climate plan, that has raised money for his government but has not reduced emissions or hit targets. Now this prime minister has the audacity to call this farm family polluters while he jets around in his private jet across the country,” Poilievre said in response to the prime minister.
“What the effect of his plan will be is to drive up domestic food production costs, drive that production out of our country to more polluting lands where it has to be transported longer distances. Why does he want to drive prices and emissions up and farm production and opportunity down?” Poilievre added.
In response to this lively debate in the Canadian Parliament, many made fun of Trudeau on Twitter.
“The look on PM Blackface’s face while he’s getting owned belongs in a Mastercard commercial,” one user tweeted.
The look on PM Blackface’s face while he’s getting owned belongs in a Mastercard commercial
— Vangranman 🇨🇦 🇺🇸 (@vangranman) October 6, 2022
“What an absolute hypocrite clown!” another tweeted in response to the debate.
Pierre Poilevre – ‘How much CO2 did you emit in the month of July?
Justin Trudeau – ‘CLiMaTE cHaNGe is REaL’
What an absolute hypocrite clown!
— Mitch Blackmore (@jugernautmitch) October 6, 2022
Another Twitter user said that the U.S. needs this kind of debate in our government.
Gosh, we need this format of debate in 🇺🇸!
— Mylan Anderson (@mylanja) October 6, 2022
While the lively parliamentary discussion format may never be in vogue in the U.S., lawmakers could learn from Poilievre’s argument around this particular issue of climate change.
Climate change is a touchy subject and there are a lot of voices calling for governments to take action against pollution and dangerous environmental practices.
But as Poilievre pointed out, there is a distinction between plans to actually improve the climate and just financial penalties and taxes.
That is the main point that should be taken away from his spar with Trudeau.
There is a line between taxation and policies that governments and politicians often like to confuse.
But there must be a continual effort to make sure that lawmakers and citizens alike are clear on the differences.
That is what Poilievre astutely pointed out that other politicians throughout the world should be noting.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.