I want to ask the member if he finds it surprising that the government would boast about programs that it has cancelled. The environment section of the budget talks about the very successful home energy retrofit program, which no longer exists. I wonder if the member would agree with me that the budget would be much improved if that program were resurrected.

Matthew Kellway: Mr. Speaker, certainly the budget would be improved and our environment would be much improved if that program still existed.

One of the curious things about that program is that when the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Natural Resources justified ending that program, they did so by trumpeting its great success and the many jobs it created, so there is no rationale for cancelling that job program.

In fact, it becomes an extremely important program for a city like Toronto. One of the curious things about the city that I live in, because of its particular built form, is that over 60% of our greenhouse gas emissions come from heating and cooling the built environment, so a program like the eco-energy program became a critical part of dealing with climate change and with greenhouse gas emissions in a city like Toronto.

I know my constituents very much regret the decision of the government to cancel that program, not only because of the improvements it brought to their own properties and because of their concern about the environment but also because of the great job potential that the program had.

The post Economic Action Plan 2013 (Bill C-60) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

In her letter, the Green Leader and Member of Parliament for Saanich-Gulf Islands emphasizes the need to diversify Canada’s energy portfolio while placing a price on carbon: “The key point is that, within the constraints of your own policies, action is needed now on climate and some portion of your budget should speak to the necessity of carbon pricing.  As well, the existing commitment to end subsidies to fossil fuels should be accelerated.”

Ms. May offered her suggestions to increase revenue and curb spending. Suggestions include:

• Fulfill commitments made at the G-20 and eliminate subsidies to fossil fuels. (+$1.2 billion)
• Cut the Prime Minister’s Office budget by 50% to levels of the Chrétien government. (+$5 million)
• Reduce government spending on advertising to 2005 levels. (+$90 million)
• Implement Estate taxes on estates exceeding $5 million. (+$1.5 billion/year)

Investment propositions include:

• Fund and expand the Eco-energy Retrofit programme. Expand it to include hospitals, schools and universities. ($1 billion)
• Invest in renewable energy and mass transit. ($1 billion)
• Invest in First Nations Education, housing, water and health care. ($1 billion)
• Establish a National Affordable Housing Program. ($834 million)
• Replenishment of the Sustainable Technology Development Fund, critical for Clean Tech.

A detailed summary of variations in revenue and spending, as well as deficit reductions, is included in the letter to Mr. Flaherty.

The post Elizabeth May Budget Consultation Letter Made Public appeared first on Elizabeth May.