SoVote

Mar/3/22 1:15:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I made a choice. That is why I did not even say what clause (c) was. At the end of the day, I am not hesitant or reluctant to debate issues, especially when it comes to natural resources. I could talk about responsible governments, whether they are the NDP in the province of British Columbia or the actions we have taken in regard to natural resources. For me, the issue is that we should be talking about Ukraine, remaining one and showing solidarity between Canadians and Ukrainians at a time when we need to be doing that. If the Conservative Party had not put forward clauses (a) and (b), and we were just focusing on natural resources, that would have been wonderful. I would have loved to have that debate. However, they should not try to mix the two in a way that I know there are going to be members of the chamber who would not vote in favour of it. The Conservative Party knows that too.

170 words

All Topics

Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP)

Mar/3/22 1:17:06 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the unfortunate timing of this debate is that it shows our allies not that some of the members in the Canadian Parliament have attacked them but that we are now potentially divided on this. I would like to ask the member about the oligarchs. Other countries are seizing private property and freezing assets. Canada has been very remiss on this. It goes even deeper, because it shows how we are a pariah internationally, known as a snow-washing state. Perhaps one of the things we could see unified coming out of this is getting at not only uncollected taxes as revenue but also the snow washing that takes place with international money. Could the member comment on that? When will Canada act on the oligarchs as other countries have?

131 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Mar/3/22 1:17:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, one of the things that should be highlighted is that the government, and in particular the Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of National Defence and others within the cabinet and members of Parliament, at least from the Liberal caucus, are open to all sorts of ideas. It is really important for us to recognize that we have allies. We need to continue to work and support our allies in supporting the Ukraine. It is about solidarity. In many ways, Canada continues to lead and to ensure that we have that strong role with our allied countries.

102 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Maguire (Brandon—Souris, CPC)

Mar/3/22 1:18:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Calgary Midnapore today. Before I begin my remarks, I want to thank the MPs in this chamber for coming together this past week as we all stand firmly behind Ukrainians and their valiant defence of their country. I want to thank the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and the other organizations that are doing all they can to raise money and to provide support to those in need. I also want to specifically highlight Volodymyr Palagniuk and his wife Iiulia, who have been instrumental in organizing and rallying support here in Ottawa. Volodymyr works for the member for Brantford—Brant, and just this past year he and his wife became Canadian citizens. I am privileged to call him a friend. I know how difficult this past week has been for him as his parents and in-laws are currently in Ukraine. He is not alone. There are countless people whose loved ones are currently under attack and whose lives are at risk. Vladimir Putin's unprovoked war is a clear violation of international law, the UN Charter and the rights of Ukraine to its sovereignty and its territorial integrity. I applaud the Government of Canada's efforts in organizing and supplying everything from military equipment to humanitarian supplies. We are working in concert with our allies around the world that have done the same. That military equipment is helping stop the Russian tanks, the armoured carriers and the helicopters and is giving the Ukrainian army and citizens the ability to defend their own country. Canada and other countries have also implemented sanctions against the Putin regime. They are designed to cripple the money supply and the movement of those closely tied to the president and the Russian military. Canada is restricting exports to Russia by halting new export permit applications and cancelling valid export permits. The government has announced it will ban crude oil, which will also include the import of refined petroleum products, which should include jet fuel and gasoline. Just this Monday at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, I moved a motion for the Department of Natural Resources to provide us with solid numbers on how much energy, minerals and other products we imported from Russia and Belarus over the last 10 years. We need a full understanding of what Canada imports from these two countries to get a better grasp on the size and scope of the natural resources that have come into our country. As other countries start to take similar steps to ban Russian energy, we must take note of the role Canadian natural gas can have in neutering potential threats. Not only can we support Ukraine in its time of need, but we must also ensure Russia does not have the financial means to terrorize sovereign nations. That takes me to the third clause of our opposition motion, which calls on the government to ensure Canadian natural gas can get to tidewater and displace Russian natural gas in Europe. Russian natural gas is flowing through the veins of Putin's war machine as we stand in the House today. As long as it continues to flow to Europe and the world, he will continue to build bombs, missiles and rockets destined to kill innocent Ukrainians. Let us never forget that. Every year, billions and billions of dollars flow into the Russian government's coffers from natural gas exports. Seventy-two per cent of Russia's natural gas exports go to the European Union. Canada has the capacity to reduce that number to zero. Since elected, I have supported ideas to grow the industry as we have the highest environmental and labour standards anywhere in the world. I have advocated for ways to get western Canada's energy to tidewater on both our coasts, and I have stood up for the sector because Canadian energy workers provide the natural gas that heats our homes. They provide the fuel that keeps our vehicles on the roads. They ensure we have the electricity to keep our economy moving. We must never forget the jobs the energy sector creates and the billions in taxes governments rely on to pay for our schools, health care and social services. The one argument I have never made in support of the industry is for defence and security reasons. On numerous occasions I have stated that Canadian natural gas should be exported to replace harmful and carbon-intensive products such as coal. I have also made the point that Canadian green technology should also be exported to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That could include advances in nuclear technology, carbon capture and other processes our great Canadian innovators have developed. The one thing I have never stated before, until today, is the necessity to get new natural gas pipelines built to permanently displace Russian natural gas in Europe. I am not saying this solely for domestic economic reasons, but to ensure that Europe can never be held hostage to the whims and intimidation tactics of the Putin regime. Displacing Russian natural gas would curb the dollars that have been used to pay for the very weapons currently being used against Ukrainian families and children. No one knows how long this horrible war will prolong. We also do not know how long Putin and his acolytes will remain in power. What we do know is that Europe must permanently make this energy pivot. The question we must ask ourselves is this. Do we wait to see what happens in the months or years ahead or do we take a decision now? I want to lay out my argument for why Parliament should send a clear signal to the government to make this a priority. First and foremost, the Putin regime must be isolated. This is already happening, but we should expedite this process in every way we can. There are always reports of Russian energy companies not being able to sell their products, even at discounted prices. As more countries start to implement similar bans, it will be more difficult for them to find customers. I would argue some of their existing customers, such as those in Europe, are in a very precarious position. Second, it will take time for new natural gas pipelines and projects to be planned, consulted on, approved and built. However, if we prioritize these projects, we can implement an assessment process that upholds best-in-class environmental standards and sets clear expectations and timelines for environmental reviews. We can set clear timelines so investors get a yes or no. We can create high-paying jobs across the provinces and work with indigenous communities to ensure they are partners in prosperity. We must harness the same level of co-operation we have shown in supporting the people of Ukraine. We can work together to severely and permanently impede the Putin regime's potential to wage war. If the government directed the necessary resources and immediately began to work with all levels of government, the private sector and indigenous communities, I believe it can be done. While in this place we may have many disagreements, I know if we work together we can create a plan to free our European allies from their reliance on Russia for their energy needs. If we agree on that end goal, then let us figure out a way to get there. Third, we know other governments are already talking about ramping up their own domestic natural gas production. For example, the Biden administration has been talking with countries in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia about stepping up natural gas production to Europe. My question for my hon. colleagues is this. Would it not be better to trust our Canadian environmental and labour standards rather than those of other countries filling that void? If we can expand Canadian natural gas exports, all MPs will be intimately involved and have direct oversight. In closing, I would like to appeal to my colleagues to support this motion. It is clear in its intent and I believe we all recognize the importance of freeing the EU from its reliance on Russian natural gas. I also recognize there is much more we can do above and beyond just expanding natural gas exports. I want to have those conversations in the coming days. However, let us seize this moment not only to help Ukraine but to put in motion a plan to deal a financial blow to limit the Putin regime's ability to wage war and threaten other nations.

1433 words

All Topics

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Mar/3/22 1:28:05 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, notwithstanding my respect for the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, as has been noted in the House, it is unfortunate and there has been an obvious condemnation of the idea to support Ukraine through the use of pipelines for natural gas. I take note that, yes, the situation in Ukraine is going to have bigger geopolitical dynamics in Europe on energy security. Would the member agree with me that this conversation should go beyond pipelines to Canada's natural endowments and how we can help supply our allies across the world with food and critical minerals that may be necessary, as well as energy, including renewables, and that the scope of this motion could have been expanded if worded in a different fashion?

126 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Maguire

Mar/3/22 1:28:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague is correct that this is not just energy. There is a food supply requirement here that is probably not going to be met if the Ukrainian people cannot put the crop in for the breadbasket of Europe this spring. It does take energy, and probably the biggest reason we are in the dilemma today is that over the years we have been a bit short-sighted. There has not been the vision to build these pipelines so that they can do two things: reduce greenhouse gas emissions around the world and make sure that our allies are not put in the difficult position of being dependent upon a regime like Putin's that can shut the tap off.

122 words

All Topics

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

Mar/3/22 1:29:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, since the start of the conflict, the Conservatives have been calling on the government to impose strong sanctions. In this morning's edition of La Presse, we learned from a respected journalist that Roman Abramovitch controls 28% of Evraz, which is supplying most of the steel to build the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and the Coastal GasLink pipeline. We also learned that another Russian oligarch, Igor Makarov, is the main shareholder in Alberta gas company Spartan Delta. These two individuals are on the United States' list of Vladimir Putin's allies. Canada is not ruling out confiscating their assets, at this time. Does my colleague agree with the Liberals? Should we continue to apply a double standard for these individuals or should we immediately impose sanctions on them?

133 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Maguire

Mar/3/22 1:30:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a similar question to one a colleague asked earlier. The more sanctions we can put on Russia right now and perhaps on Belarus, the better off we are in regard to closing off the flow of dollars going into Ukraine to fund the war effort. The oligarchs, the people who have invested in some of these industries, are not immune to that and need to be sanctioned as well.

73 words

All Topics

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Mar/3/22 1:31:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I certainly agree with the first and second parts of the motion, but it is the third part that I have a problem with, that oil and gas provision, and the way it seems the Conservative Party is trying to take advantage of this as some sort of deal they can make. Would it not be better if we could talk more about humanitarian assistance? International development assistance is only at 0.31% of our GNI this year because of consecutive government decisions to cut. Does the member agree that Canada should be increasing its funding for international development? In the motion, the Conservatives could have asked for that from the government in the upcoming budget.

118 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Maguire

Mar/3/22 1:32:25 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will go back to the answer I gave to my first question. It is about the lack of vision and the short-sightedness of the government in power today. It does not have the vision to foresee that some of these things might be needed down the road. However, the best time to plant a tree is today, and the best way to deal with the Putin regime taking over and trying to destroy the country of Ukraine and its people is to sanction it as harshly as we can today. Let us have the vision to put in place the types of donations, support programs, military support—

112 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Mar/3/22 1:33:13 p.m.
Watch

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Calgary Midnapore.

8 words

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie (Calgary Midnapore, CPC)

Mar/3/22 1:33:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to speak in this chamber. It is an honour to speak on behalf of the people of Calgary Midnapore. I come here today as a proud woman who is one-quarter Ukrainian, so it is also an honour for me to be here today speaking not only for the people of Ukraine, but also for my ancestors, who come from this incredible nation that is so challenged at this time. When I arrive to this chamber, it is always after giving a lot of thought beforehand to matters of the day, like the opposition motion today. When I wonder about the situation that we find this resilient nation in, the same question comes to my mind that I ask about many of the world's problems and many of the problems we have seen in our nation recently. That question is, how did it come to this? I will give members some insight into that, according to the research I have done. If we look at an article by Bill Browder in AFP, we will see it says that Russia has “a stagnant economy, the most extreme wealth disparity of any major country, and endemic hopelessness that infects millions of ordinary citizens.” It is not a great place for Putin to begin. A New York Times article says this: Mr. Putin has described the Soviet disintegration as a catastrophe that robbed Russia of its rightful place among the world’s great powers and put it at the mercy of a predatory West. He has spent his 22 years in power rebuilding Russia’s military and reasserting its geopolitical clout. The Russian president calls NATO’s expansion menacing, and the prospect of Ukraine joining it a major threat to his country. As Russia has grown more assertive and stronger militarily, his complaints about NATO have grown more strident. Bill Browder goes on to say: Putin also knows that the West has never really held him accountable for his past actions. Since 2008, he has invaded Georgia, taken Crimea, occupied Eastern Ukraine, bombed hospitals in Syria, shot down a passenger plane, and hacked governments and businesses around the world. The West’s response? A few sanctions, removal from the G-8, and the expulsion of a handful of diplomats. How could this happen? Well, Canada does in fact have a part in this. Let us look to the Speech from the Throne. It states, “This is the moment to fight for a secure, just, and equitable world.” However, what do we see? We see the government's lack of action in Venezuela. There is no clear offer to mediate the conflict. It is ignoring the roles of Russia and China, which are scheming together, potentially, for further action. There was too little aid too late, with Digest Venezuela recently saying that 96% of Venezuelans are living in poverty. In Saudi Arabia, we saw very similar inaction by the government against a dictatorship and a lack of democracy. Twitter was used to speak against the kingdom following the imprisonment of civil society and women's rights activists. We saw the government's aid with an export permit of 1.5 billion dollars' worth of arms, yet it dragged its heels when it came to Ukraine. It never spoke up in December 2008 with the murder of the journalist Khashoggi. Let us go to Hungary now briefly, where Orbán's centralized power weakened the rule of law, academic freedom and freedom of the press. The Prime Minister's government refused to take a tougher stance against Orbán. Again I will say that it did not have to come to this. Leading up to this, Canada should not have ignored its investment in Canada's military. Maintaining our NATO commitment to invest 2% on military spending should have been prioritized, but it never was. The Conservative 2021 platform called for intensifying Operation Unifier, the Canadian Armed Forces's military training and capacity-building mission in Ukraine, supplying Ukraine with lethal weapons and reinstating the provision of RADARSAT imagery. My colleague who just spoke, the member for Brandon—Souris, indicated that the government has consistently had a lack of vision, a lack of foresight, in the protection of not only Canada but the rest of the safe western democratic world. This also, of course, is relevant when we speak about energy. Members may have seen the Globe and Mail article by Konrad Yakabuski, who said: Canada missed the boat during an LNG development boom a decade ago. It must not make the same mistake again. Yielding to pressure from environmentalists who oppose LNG export terminals and gas pipelines on the grounds that such developments prolong global dependence on fossil fuels, or prevent Canada from meeting its own greenhouse-gas reduction targets, will only end up strengthening the hand of Mr. Putin and his fellow dictators. Members can see that we are not using this opposition motion to divide Canadians. We are giving Canada an opportunity to help the world and defend the world with the use of our clean, safe natural resources. I wish I could say it ends there, with Canada not having done its due diligence and not having done its work in the world, but it goes beyond that. Did members know that Russia is currently a member of the International Court of Justice? It is the very international body that may try Russia's leader and the nation for the war crimes we are seeing. Russia also sits on the United Nations Economic and Social Council. How can it be that this dictator is determining economic and social policy between nations for the entire world? The current membership of the Human Rights Council includes nations such as Eritrea, Bolivia, Cuba and Venezuela. I will talk more about these nations momentarily, but they do not have a standard of excellence historically for supporting human rights. Of course, Russia is currently on the UN Security Council too. That is unbelievable. It is not just Canada that has been derelict in its duty of holding this nation to account. It has stood beside other nations of the world that have let this happen. We saw this most recently with the draft resolution A/ES-11 condemning these actions in Ukraine. It is true that dictators are standing with Putin. It is those of Belarus, North Korea, Eritrea and Syria. However, the United Nations, an organization that promotes the safety and well-being of the world, has not done its work here. When it comes to the world and natural resources, I turn to an article by Stephen J. Blank, entitled “The Balkans and Euro-Atlantic Energy Security”, where he states, “Russia’s objectives in helping to foment this crisis are clear. They entail restoring its energy hegemony and political leverage over numerous European countries.” In addition, the European Union recently released a report on this, where it stated, “Energy policy is often used as a foreign policy tool, in particular in major energy producing and transit countries.” The commission said: As part of a revitalised European energy and climate diplomacy, the EU will use all its foreign policy instruments to establish strategic energy partnerships with increasingly important producing and transit countries or regions.... The EU will continue to integrate Norway fully into its internal energy policies. The EU will also develop its partnerships with countries such as the United States and Canada. In conclusion, Canada has failed by allowing this situation to escalate and allowing this invasion to take place, and it has done so alongside the world. The government's idea, or that of anyone in the House from the Bloc, the Green Party or the NDP, that we are putting forward this motion only for our interests is untrue. We are standing today for natural resources, for the safety and security of Canadians and for our rightful place in the world as a leader. We are protecting the safety and security of the world.

1358 words

All Topics

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Mar/3/22 1:43:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in listening to my colleague's speech, I noticed that the Conservative talking point today is that energy policy is part of foreign policy. I see it another way: Are the Conservatives not using foreign policy to benefit their oil?

42 words

All Topics

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie

Mar/3/22 1:43:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I sit here every day that the House is sitting. Every day, I hear the Bloc Québécois ask questions on the environment and against the oil sector. It bothers me a lot that his party has suddenly decided that talking about oil is bad when he uses oil as a political tool every day in the House.

63 words

All Topics

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Mar/3/22 1:44:14 p.m.
Watch

Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji. I am shocked with many elements raised in this debate. This motion is like a wolf in a sheep's coat. For the Conservatives to tout energy policy as foreign policy in the face of the humanitarian crisis in the Ukraine is deplorable. I appreciate the need to have long-term strategies; however, we must do so with the same spirit and courage as the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky. Does the member agree that if we were to ask the President how to assist his beautiful country and his beautiful people that oil and gas expansion measures are the last thing that he would ask for?

108 words

All Topics

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie

Mar/3/22 1:44:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague very much for the question, and I really enjoy having her in the House as the new member for Nunavut, but I disagree with what she is saying. I believe that the President of Ukraine, a free and democratic nation, would absolutely support our opposition motion here today and the idea of building pipelines, methods and ways to get our ethically produced, clean natural resources as a gift to all of the world, including his own nation, so I disagree with the member. I believe President Zelensky would welcome this opposition day motion.

99 words

All Topics

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Mar/3/22 1:45:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, despite what the hon. member for Calgary Midnapore may believe President Zelensky wants, it is more likely to be consistent with what the Ukrainian lead of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said last week. Dr. Svitlana Krakowska said, in effect, that the root causes of the war in Ukraine and the root causes of the climate crisis are the same: dependence on fossil fuels. Ukraine stands against them, and for renewables.

74 words

All Topics

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie

Mar/3/22 1:46:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for Saanich—Gulf Islands. What this opposition day stands for and what our party stands for is what these other parties seem to be against, and that is freedom, that is democracy, that is world order, that is the rule of law, and guess what? When we have those things, we get better outcomes for the environment, we get better outcomes for women, and we get better outcomes for minorities. They should learn that.

81 words

All Topics

Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)

Mar/3/22 1:46:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her great words. It is not just that we will do everything that we can to help Ukraine at this time; I think our allies and friends in Europe would also really appreciate something to back up the threat to their gas dependence and oil dependence, which is now jeopardized. Would the member not agree?

65 words

All Topics

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie

Mar/3/22 1:47:07 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my incredible colleague for Sarnia—Lambton for that question. The member is right, as I am sure she has also read the report from the EU, which states that eastern Europe needs to move beyond its energy dependence on Russia. My colleague is exactly on track with her line of thinking as well as with the EU.

62 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 40