Scott Anderson

Slower phase-down, production first

The other end of this axis: Faster fossil phase-down

excerpts repeat calls to keep using fossil fuels, eliminate carbon tax and tap resources

Reality suggests that we have to use fossil fuels for the foreseeable future while we transition into technologies that we may not even understand at this time.

Higher spending and more capability

The other end of this axis: Restrain spending and deployments

questions lack of defence on vessels and calls for NATO spending discussion

I would like to give a notice of motion: That the committee invite the Minister of National Defence and the Secretary of State (Defence Procurement) to appear before the committee for no less than 1 hour each, within 14 days of the adoption of this motion, in relation to their mandates and NATO defence spending.

Expand production and export

The other end of this axis: Restrict new oil and gas

excerpts repeat demands to repeal anti-energy laws, kill carbon tax and tap natural resources

If the Liberals are serious about making Canada an energy superpower, they need to repeal their own anti-energy agenda, lift Bill C-69, remove Bill C-48, kill the industrial carbon tax and get Canadians back to work by finally tapping into our natural resources.

Provinces lead

The other end of this axis: Ottawa leads

excerpts criticize federal reviews and Ottawa as the problem

In the Monashees, responsible mining projects with strong local support are stalled in endless federal reviews. While the world clamours for critical minerals, we are stuck in neutral.

Lower taxes and tighter spending

The other end of this axis: Higher taxes and public spending

excerpts repeat opposition to carbon tax, deficits and high taxation

Government needs to get out of the way, not stand in the way. If we want to help our farmers, let us remove the industrial gas tax. That is what is hurting farmers right now, more than anything else.

Assertive alliances and sanctions

The other end of this axis: Alliance restraint

questions non-NATO aid and calls for NATO spending focus

I think Canadians understand why we're supporting NATO. I'm not sure some Canadians understand why we are sending $6.5 billion to a non-NATO nation. For the benefit of Canadians, can one of you explain why we are doing that?

Lower intake

The other end of this axis: Higher permanent intake

excerpts criticize too many people and expanded citizenship without checks

We have no idea what the actual number of new Canadian citizens will be, and this is at a time when our immigration system is buckling, frankly, from too many people coming in. To add to that is reckless, as I said in the speech. It is irresponsible and it is reckless.

Deeper continental integration

The other end of this axis: Diversify away from one partner

Excerpts criticize failure to secure softwood agreement with the United States.

When the Prime Minister took office, softwood lumber tariffs were at 14%. Now they are at 45%. This year in north Okanagan, hard-working people are being sent home from mills because of the government's failure to secure a softwood lumber agreement.