SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 113

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 19, 2022 02:00PM
  • Oct/19/22 6:08:34 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-5 
Madam Speaker, the question I have for my friend really boils down to whether he trusts the government to determine whether a substance is toxic, like a straw or a pen. It is saying all plastics are toxic. Plastics are— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
46 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/22 6:09:06 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-5 
Madam Speaker, the real hypocrisy is that the Liberals had a previous member who was a minister, and in her riding in Chester, Nova Scotia, they have this technology, Sustane, whereby they can take plastics, distill them down to their original form, the different oils, and use them as biofuel. Instead of that, what do the Liberals do? They just ban straws all together. As my colleague said, these paper straws have an even larger carbon footprint. Does my colleague feel that he can trust the government to politically ascertain what is toxic and what is not?
97 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/22 6:27:05 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-5 
Madam Speaker, who, on this side of the bench, is the so-called biggest climate denier? Historically, what has occurred is that, when a scientific basis for a comment or an explanation is not in reach or does not exist, their reaction is to automatically call the person who is questioning the science behind what they are stating some sort of name.
62 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/22 6:28:58 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-5 
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, if you check the record, you will find that when he asked that question last time, I replied that I agreed that the climate has been changing since—
36 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/22 6:39:27 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-5 
Madam Speaker, I was beginning to think there was a scintilla of hope that if this bill went to committee, there would be some sort of redemption, but the member opposite convinced me that there is not even going to be an attempt to make these initial decisions based on a scintilla of science. He said that somebody might be afraid or feel that something might be toxic and it is put on the list, but that is not the way we do it. We have a rigorous system for developing the list of toxic chemicals that exist here or that can be brought into Canada. He mentioned lead paint. I am sure he would be comforted to know that in Canada and the United States, we have not been putting lead in paint since 1992, not to say what is on the walls already that should not be. From what he says, somebody who fears that ground beef could be toxic could have it put on the list and everybody would be denied ground beef and it would have a warning label. Actually, that was proposed earlier this year. I am glad that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency thought better of it.
203 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border