44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 15, 2023 11:00AM
- May/15/23 1:24:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there is a serious problem. The interpretation is not working. Perhaps some headsets are not working properly. Can that be checked?
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/15/23 1:36:19 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I would like to hear some more details, specifically about whether this bill does anything to guarantee a healthy environment.
How does the member explain the fact that this bill is primarily technical, despite the seriousness of the climate crisis? It is really too bad that the bill's sponsor did not have the guts to consider what might happen after Bill S-5 passes.
68 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/15/23 5:52:03 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the people of Laurentides—Labelle to speak to Bill S‑5, the strengthening environmental protection for a healthier Canada act.
I want to begin by saying that the Bloc Québécois is in favour in principle of the bill. However, a word of caution: Agreeing in principle does not mean signing a blank cheque.
As my colleagues know, our party is highly allergic to anything to do with jurisdictions and the federal government's intrusion into matters that are the responsibility of the Government of Quebec. It is in our DNA. We know that the current government will use any excuse to interfere in provincial jurisdictions.
I would say to my colleagues across the way to not think they can take us in. That seems to be a clear pattern in the government's legislative agenda. I want to remind the federal government that the elected members of the National Assembly of Quebec are against any federal government intervention in environmental matters, except where the current legal framework makes the Government of Canada responsible for certain provisions. That is why the Bloc Québécois will keep a close watch. We will ensure that the federal government takes care of its responsibilities properly before taking on more.
Bill S-5 is, first and foremost, a technical bill, which is a shame. This bill is not ambitious enough to address the current climate crisis. It is unbelievable. Bold action is needed. It is important to act to ensure that the right to live in a healthy environment is enshrined in law, as it is in Quebec. In 2006, the Quebec National Assembly passed legislation that states, “Every person has a right to live in a healthful environment in which biodiversity is preserved, to the extent and according to the standards provided by law”.
That is not yet the case in Canada.
The United Nations passed a resolution on July 26, 2022. In the resolution the UN said that:
...climate change and environmental degradation were some of the most pressing threats to humanity's future. It called on states to step up efforts to ensure their people have access to a “clean, healthy and sustainable environment”.
That is not yet the case in Canada.
In 2021, the New York State Assembly passed a constitutional amendment to enshrine the right to a healthy environment in the state constitution.
That is not yet the case in Canada.
In 2004, the French government incorporated an environmental charter into the French constitution. I would like to share part of the preamble:
Natural resources and equilibriums have conditioned the emergence of mankind;
The future and very existence of mankind are inextricably linked with its natural environment;
The environment is the common heritage of all mankind;
Mankind exerts ever-increasing influence over the conditions for life and its own evolution;
Biological diversity, the fulfilment of the person and the progress of human societies are affected by certain types of consumption or production and by excessive exploitation of natural resources;
Care must be taken to safeguard the environment along with the other fundamental interests of the Nation;
In order to ensure sustainable development, choices designed to meet the needs of the present generation should not jeopardise the ability of future generations and other peoples to meet their own needs,
...
This is not yet the case in Canada.
In Laurentides—Labelle, nature is a way of life. I am sure that everyone listening to me would agree. It has a national park, the oldest one in Quebec, by the way, along with two wildlife reserves, regional parks scattered across the riding, and countless lakes and rivers. Laurentides—Labelle alone has over 10,000. Nature surrounds us, but it is also a major economic driver for the northern Laurentians.
Early in my career, I worked in the forest industry for seven years. I am very proud of the industry personally, but also on behalf of the Antoine-Labelle regional county municipality, where it still plays an important role to this day.
Let us look back into the past. In the 2000s, the forestry industry was seen as harmful in many ways. Fortunately, science has come to the rescue of this industry. We now know, and I hope everyone does, that forest management is imperative if we want healthy forests. Our forests are key to our health and to our environment. They capture CO2. We could talk about the two billion trees that will probably never get planted by 2030 despite the government's promise to do so. Sometimes I have to make people aware that a fully mature tree releases all of the CO2 that it captured. Nature takes its course. We can see the forest fires and epidemics that are happening now. If we use our forests wisely and we use the raw material with secondary and tertiary processing products to construct new builds, we are helping to preserve the environment.
I will fight until the end, as I have been doing since I was 20 years old, to make people aware of how important the forestry industry is to both our environmental and economic ecosystems. I cannot emphasize it enough. It is the very definition of sustainable development, and our region is on the front lines.
Two weeks ago to the day, I was really worried about the images I was seeing from Laurentides—Labelle. In Sainte‑Agathe‑des‑Monts, the Demontigny Street bridge and the Château-Bleu Road bridge were closed. The water level, the highest it has ever been, made the roads impassable, and they are still impassable today. The same situation is playing out in Val‑Morin, where the 7th Avenue bridge is badly damaged. In Sainte‑Adèle, several roads have also been closed because they are too dangerous to use. Lac Raymond, the Rivière du Nord and the Rivière aux Mulets were overflowing. Homes flooded and infrastructure needs to be rebuilt.
This is unusual in southern Laurentides—Labelle, just as it is in many other parts of Quebec. I am of course thinking of the people of Baie‑Saint‑Paul, in Charlevoix. Extreme weather events are now frequent. It is outrageous.
There was the derecho in May 2022, the rock slides in Mont‑Tremblant last summer and the ice storm in early April. We must act. This bill is called the strengthening environmental protection for a healthier Canada act. It is time for the government to have the courage to act. People ask me if enough is being done. People know that not enough is being done. In fact, they actually feel as though nothing is being done. Let us have the courage to act, because healthy citizens are the ones who have a healthy environment and who benefit from a healthy economy focused on sustainable development.
1173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/15/23 6:02:54 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, how can they say that they listened to the proposals, took action, accepted the changes to the legislation, when they ignored the individuals themselves, for example from the forestry industry, who were consulted and who provided recommendations? The proposals presented by the Bloc Québécois came from the forestry industry.
I am having a hard time understanding why the recommendations made in committee were completely dismissed and are not included in the bill.
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/15/23 6:04:47 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I told the people of Laurentides—Labelle that we had an example in the promise to plant two billion trees by 2030. People are wondering. Are they really going to change the law to try to have a healthy environment when they are so behind in everything I just outlined in the past few minutes?
People need to have more confidence and to hear from all parliamentarians. This is not about telling them that we are going to adopt this bill and make amendments later.
I was saying that they need to have the courage to take action and now is the time to do it. As long as we do not see a modicum of effort and energy, we will continue to fight because we do not believe them.
133 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/15/23 6:06:04 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, when the government implements small measures, it often does so to ease its conscience. Had it had the courage to act, it would have overhauled the environmental law. We are among the laggards. It is embarrassing when we go abroad and are told about the state of our law. I believe that answers my colleague's question
59 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
