44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 29, 2023 11:00AM
Mr. Speaker, to hear that we will finally be able to make the use of wood a priority is music to my ears.
I was around during the forestry crisis in Quebec back in the 2000s. After the decision to go green, it became clear how little information about the use of wood had reached insurers, schools and future engineers and architects.
Quebec has had a proven track record for more than a decade. In my colleague's opinion, is it not high time Canada passed this bill?
88 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is past high time for this bill to be adopted. Quebec brought forward the wood charter many years ago. British Columbia brought in its Wood First Act. This is the kind of bill we need in the federal world to push for federal infrastructure to be built with wood and other environmentally friendly products so we can fight climate change, support the forest industry and have beautiful, safe buildings that will last for centuries.
77 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am so used to dealing with questions that I forgot that it was time for my speech. Thank you for the opportunity to give my speech.
However, I think what I just said is still relevant to any speech. Maybe my colleague could answer that question at another time.
Anyway, we are discussing Bill S‑222. The “S” means that the bill originated in the Senate. Unelected representatives are making a contribution to the debate by introducing the bill that is before us. Quebec got rid of its version of the Senate. Eventually, at the federal level, some thought will need to be given to what to do with the Senate, with this group of people who do not represent the population, but who are simply appointed by the sitting Prime Minister. The very concept is hard to explain.
Let me get back to Bill S‑222, which seeks to ensure that the government considers the benefits of wood in developing its requirements before launching calls for tender. That is not a bad thing. It is actually a good thing, because it means that there is a willingness to do more for wood construction. We cannot be against that. That is why the Bloc Québécois intends to support Bill S‑222.
However, we think that this bill lacks ambition. It could have gone further. It could have pushed harder. That said, that may be just what Bill S‑222 and its sponsor intended, namely to do something that is not overly ambitious and that does not go too far so that it can get the approval of the government, which itself does not have much ambition for wood or the forest industry in Quebec. Maybe the sponsor thought that a bill that does not go too far would stand a better chance of being supported by the Liberals.
That is too bad, because we in the Bloc Québécois have raised this issue in the past. In 2010, Bill C‑249 was tabled by Gérard Asselin, the former member for Manicouagan, a heavily forested riding. He was keenly aware of the reality and needs of the forest industry and the need to look to the future on this issue. In 2014, the Bloc Québécois tried again with Bill C‑574, tabled by Claude Patry, the former member for Jonquière—Alma. He had initially been elected as an NDP member, but he came to realize that that party did not represent Quebec, so he decided to join the Bloc Québécois. I should note that Jonquière—Alma is also a heavily forested region.
Those two MPs understood Quebec, its needs and the importance of pushing harder for wood construction. The big difference between Bill S‑222 and the Bloc Québécois bills is the use of different terms to promote wood construction. The Bloc bills speak of “giv[ing] preference to” the use of wood, whereas Bill S‑222 speaks of “consider[ing]” wood's comparative advantages. Of course, “considering” is fine, but “giving preference to” is just that much stronger.
That is what we would have liked to see in this bill, and we will be pushing for it if the bill returns to the House for third reading. We are very hopeful that this bill will get unanimous support in the House. There is hope that will happen. I have yet to hear from all my colleagues on that point, but it would be an encouraging sign for Quebec's forestry industry, which, unfortunately, does not receive sufficient support from the federal government.
It seems like the federal government in Ottawa only has eyes for oil. Whenever oil comes up, dollar signs are not far away. The oil industry gets cheques and subsidies to the tune of billions of dollars. However, when it comes to the forestry industry, it is a whole other story. The government finds it really tough to provide the support that Quebec's forestry industry needs. Often, it gives our forestry industry peanuts, while sending hundreds of millions of dollars across the country, with a bit going to British Columbia and a bit going to eastern Canada.
One year, I thought I was hallucinating, because I read that it was offering financial assistance to deal with spruce budworm. I thought it was great that the government was announcing financial assistance for that in its budget, but then I realized it was only for eastern Canada and British Columbia. There was not a cent for Quebec. It was as if there were no forests in Quebec, as if Quebec's forestry industry did not exist.
That basically shows us what this government's priority is, that is, everything but Quebec. That about sums it up. Quebec is more advanced than Canada when it comes to wood. Of course, we welcome and support Canadian initiatives like this bill, but Quebec already has its own policy for incorporating wood into construction. It is a useful policy that perhaps the Canadian government should learn from. The aim of the policy is to ensure that wood is systematically incorporated into all new buildings whenever possible.
Why should wood be used in construction? I think that it is an essential element, a crucial element. In fact, the Quebec Construction Code was actually amended in 2010 and 2015 to allow the construction of six-storey wooden buildings. Today, the Régie du bâtiment du Québec, Quebec's building authority, even allows for buildings with up to 12 floors under certain conditions. A specific application must be submitted, and it must demonstrate that this would be feasible and that it would be done safely. In short, builders can construct wooden buildings up to 12 stories tall. That is significant.
What we know is that about 80% of all commercial, industrial and institutional buildings could be built of wood. Almost everything could be built of wood. We know that residential wood construction is already quite strong. In that respect, not much promotion is needed even though, at times, construction that could be done in wood is not.
For Quebec, forests are more than trees. They are much more than that. In fact, they are part of our identity, part of who we are. They are part of our territory, of our history. They are part of the collective imagination in Quebec.
For hundreds of years, as we know, the fabled settlers were farmers in the summer and lumberjacks in the winter. In our collective imagination, the forest is inseparable from Quebec's identity. In a way, it goes much further than the famous two-by-four. Two-by-fours are interesting because they symbolize construction itself, but much more can be done. In the past, there was the craze surrounding newsprint, which was the main wood product for a long time. Today, that needs to be rethought and other stronger and more relevant products need to be found going forward.
The forest in Quebec is our past and our present, but it is also our future. Unfortunately, it is being neglected. I repeat: it is being neglected by the Canadian government, the federal government, for whom it is not a priority. Its priority is oil, and that shows in the investments.
Obviously, in Quebec, we are proud of our forests and we would like to be able to promote them more. Today, there is more and more talk about buying local and short distribution channels, for example. That is precisely it. Wood is taken from Quebec and is used in construction in Quebec. Is that not incredible? Jobs are created in the regions of Quebec with that wood. Is that not incredible? That is all our regions are asking for: the ability to develop our forests.
Unlike oil, wood is a renewable resource. The use of wood is environmentally friendly. When construction uses steel or concrete, for example, what happens? Greenhouse gases are emitted. When construction uses wood, the carbon is captured. The opposite happens. In fact, it is much better. It is magical in a way.
It is far more magical than those facilities receiving millions, not to say billions, of dollars in subsidies from the federal government for carbon capture and sequestration. We do not know whether it has been scientifically proven or whether anything will come of it. We know that there is one thing that works: timber construction. Why not take that direction? One cubic metre of wood captures one tonne of CO2, which is a pretty big amount.
While Canada is pumping billions of dollars into oil, I encourage everyone to support our timber industry for a strong Quebec, a green Quebec, a Quebec that is proud of its forests, that does not neglect them, that takes care of them and that takes care of the planet.
I hope that the House will pass Bill S-222. The government has been taking a hands-off approach, in particular by allowing Resolute Forest Products to be bought out by Chinese interests. It needs to adopt a policy that will allow us to take care of our forests and promote our products, and it needs to invest the money needed to make that work.
1586 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 12:56:17 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, there is one thing I am fully prepared to recognize, and that is the hon. member's love for Quebec and Quebeckers.
I know that he knows—as I said a few moments ago in a parliamentary committee—that Quebeckers do not exist in a vacuum, that they live on planet Earth and that, last year, according to a study by the École des hautes études commerciales de Montréal, Quebeckers consumed 18 billion litres of oil. Today's reality is that Quebeckers consumed 18 billion litres of oil last year.
I am more than willing to hear all the arguments about getting rid of oil, because it is terrible, because it is this or that. Yes, but the fact is that Quebec consumes 18 billion litres of oil. In addition, 47% of that oil comes from the United States. The last time I checked, neither Texas nor Louisiana contribute to equalization.
163 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 12:57:13 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, I appreciated my colleague's comments and his speech.
I liked the part in his speech where he said that it was okay to disagree with people from his own party, or with the leader of his party. I agree with that.
I noticed a few things. There is a kind of division that I have a hard time rationalizing. For example, some Conservative members believe in climate change and some do not. In my opinion, the distinction seems geographic.
Can my hon. colleague from Quebec explain why he is being cautious about the oil and gas sector when it comes to this bill?
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:00:08 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, as some often suggest, people on opposite sides of the world eventually come together. Perhaps that is why the Greens and the Conservatives will be voting the same way, but obviously for different reasons.
The only thing I would like to add about Bill C-69 is something Alexandre Shields wrote in an article on the subject. He said that the office of the environment minister declined to comment on the matter, because it remains a “hypothetical project”. However, the minister did recall the provisions of the act, which clearly stipulate that a new dam would be subject to the act.
If the Quebec government decides to go ahead with a new hydroelectric dam, Ottawa has no say in the matter.
125 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:01:53 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois believes that the Quebec nation has sole jurisdiction over public decisions concerning the environment and Quebec's territory.
On April 13, 2022, parliamentarians belonging to all political parties represented in the National Assembly of Quebec unanimously adopted a motion affirming the primacy of Quebec's jurisdiction in matters of the environment. The elected officials of Quebec unanimously oppose “any intervention by the federal government in matters of the environment on Quebec territory”. The Bloc Québécois fully endorses that position and strongly advocates for the interests and values of Quebec in the federal political arena.
That said, in the existing legal framework, the federal government has certain environmental protection responsibilities. Bill S‑5 is part of that effort. Unfortunately, what is lacking are ambitions to guide action on this important file that is environmental protection.
What is even more concerning is the fact that environmental protection, which has been undermined for some time, requires us to make up for measures that should have been implemented a long time ago. This was discussed in our last debate when my colleague from Repentigny called for prevention to be a fundamental pillar of this law.
Quebec's Environment Quality Act, adopted in 1978, underwent a major reform in 2017. The act seeks to protect the environment and safeguard the species inhabiting it. Quebec law prohibits the deterioration of the quality of the environment or the emission of pollutants or contaminants.
In addition to our Civil Code, the following laws are also related to environmental protection in Quebec and its support: the Sustainable Development Act, the Act to affirm the collective nature of water resources and to promote better governance of water and associated environments, the Natural Heritage Conservation Act and the Act respecting the conservation and development of wildlife.
I had the honour of working on improving the first Quebec law on sustainable development introduced in 2004 at the National Assembly of Quebec and adopted in 2006. I remember the discussions we had about principles related to the foundation of sustainable development, including the precautionary principle. I will come back to that.
Obviously, I need to seek unanimous consent to share my time with my colleague from Repentigny.
381 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:11:35 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact that, at least in good part, we have support coming from the Bloc with regard to Bill S-5.
One of the issues that the hon. member raised was guaranteeing a healthy environment for Canadians. When I look at the legislation, it is a very strong and powerful step in the right direction. I think Canadians as a whole would see it as positive. I have no doubt that it would take a bit of time to work out how we best deal with ensuring that right.
Does the Bloc believe that the only way it could be dealt with is through a constitutional change? If so, does the member really believe that, whether in Quebec, Manitoba or any other jurisdiction, people want to see the Constitution reopened?
134 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:13:37 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois member began his speech by talking about Quebec's primary jurisdiction over the environment and about how Quebec should have full power over environmental matters within its territory.
My question is this. The Bloc Québécois avoided saying much of anything about independence during the past two election campaigns, but this weekend, it talked about little else. Why did this party, which claims to be more separatist than ever, support an amendment by the Liberals, the New Democrats, the Greens and the independents that is a direct attack on a provincial jurisdiction?
More importantly, how is it that, on June 13, 2019, in the House, this member and other colleagues behind him voted in favour of Bill C-69, which gives the federal government veto power over hydroelectric dam projects in Quebec?
146 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:14:37 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether my colleague followed the work that was done in committee. One thing is certain. If he wanted to be more accurate, he could have at least said that the Bloc Québécois worked really hard and that its amendment to have the federal government respect Quebec's jurisdictions was not adopted.
My colleague conveniently forgot to mention that because what he is known for in the debates that we have in the House is always putting a partisan spin on things that everyone should agree on and that should be dealt with in a non-partisan manner.
Talking about our convention when we are supposed to be talking about Bill S-5 seems rather obvious and pointless to me. I could have done the same thing, but that is his approach. That is why we are very different, and that is likely why we are not members of the same party.
162 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:27:16 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for the question.
The advantage, for example, in Europe, is that assessments are done by family of toxic substances, allowing much more to get done. What happens here is that the substance is put on the market and the assessment is done afterward. In the meantime, if the substance is unfortunately declared toxic, it ends up in our consumer products and in the air. That is what I really wanted to see change.
Yes, in Quebec we have our department and our laws, which are much stricter and more restrictive than federal legislation, but the thing is, the environment is across Canada, it is across the planet. Essentially, we have to try to adopt best practices. Unfortunately we had the opportunity to do that, but we did not.
135 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 1:28:20 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, important things are happening here in Parliament, but important things are also happening in society. On behalf of the NDP, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge the sudden passing of the Quebec actor Michel Côté and to offer our condolences to his family and friends. This is an immense loss for the Quebec theatre community and the artistic community. I am sure my colleague shares these sentiments.
On the subject of the environment, it is all well and good to have the right to a healthy environment, but many folks would argue that this does not go far enough and that we should be using a new term, “ecocide”, which would put environmental crimes on the same level as war crimes and crimes against humanity. Instances of massive environmental destruction could then be prosecuted before the International Criminal Court. There is a whole movement known as Stop Ecocide Canada and Stop Ecocide International.
Is this something my colleague could see being useful for defending the environment?
176 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:03:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today, we have lost one of the greats. Michel Côté has left us.
He always made us laugh and now, leaving us like this, he has broken our hearts. He had a spectacular career, first with Marcel Gauthier and Marc Messier in Broue, the most popular play in Quebec history. A record 6 million people have gone to see it. That is phenomenal. His television hits include Omertà: la Loi du silence and La petite vie; we all cherished Pierre Gauthier and Jean-Lou, two characters who were polar opposites. His movies include Cruising Bar, Liste noire, Le dernier tunnel, C.R.A.Z.Y.—in which I had the honour and privilege of starring alongside him—and De père en flic, to name but a few.
He is a giant who has left his mark on generations of Quebeckers, and will continue to do so for a long time to come. Quebec's artistic community has just lost one of its most extraordinary representatives.
To his family, friends, loved ones and all Quebeckers, I offer my deepest condolences.
192 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:05:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, all of Quebec is in mourning today. Iconic actor Michel Côté has left us far too soon at the age of 72.
This immensely and uniquely talented man, who was proud to call Lac-Saint-Jean home, had a profound effect on generations of Quebeckers who saw him perform on the stage and on screens big and small. From Broue and C.R.A.Z.Y. to La petite vie and Omertà, Michel Côté made us laugh and he made us cry. He had a singular knack for bringing to life the characters he played, as varied as they were. Regardless of what part he was playing, we believed it. Wherever he went, we followed.
Michel Côté was a respectful and respected man who has left an indelible mark on our history. He is no longer with us, but he will live on forever in our hearts and minds as one of the greats.
On behalf of my colleagues, I want to offer my heartfelt condolences to his lifelong partner, Véronique Le Flaguais, to his sons, Charles and Maxime, and to his many friends.
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:16:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebec is in mourning. Quebec is in shock. Michel Côté is no longer with us. Our thoughts are with his family and friends. We extend our deepest condolences to them.
We are also thinking of those close to him, but we now realize that we were all close to him. Michel Côté was a part of our lives, and we are collectively and individually in mourning.
There are great actors we admire, and there are popular actors we adore. Michel Côté was both: part Gilles Latulippe, part Jean Duceppe. He left his mark with roles in C.R.A.Z.Y., Cruising Bar, Omertà and La p'tite vie.
He gave us moments of laughter, joy and pure emotion—
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:17:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebec is in mourning. Quebec is in shock. Michel Côté has left us. Our thoughts are with his family and friends. We extend our sincere condolences to them.
We are obviously thinking of those close to him, but we suddenly realize that we were all close to him. Michel Côté was a part of our lives, and we are collectively and individually in mourning.
There are great actors we admire, and there are popular actors we adore. Michel Côté was both: part Gilles Latulippe, part Jean Duceppe. He left his mark with roles in C.R.A.Z.Y., Cruising Bar, Omertà and La p'tite vie.
He gave us moments of laughter, joy and pure emotion, for which we will be eternally grateful. It was fun having him with us. It is sad that he is no longer here.
I invite everyone to watch one of his movies, one of his shows or even one of his interviews. Let us take the time to see what an amazing human being he was, what a great actor he was, and to enjoy his sense of humour, his playfulness and his humanity.
Michel Côté was was one of the greats, and he was one of us. We miss him already.
224 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:32:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the government needs to back up those words with action and protect the factory.
Across Canada, rent prices are skyrocketing, and Quebec is no exception. Rent keeps increasing at a breakneck pace. In Montreal, rent for a one-bedroom unit is now more than $2,100. For most Quebeckers, that means there is not much left to pay the bills and buy groceries.
When will this government finally step up and put an end to this crisis?
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:33:10 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
I would like to remind him that, since our initiative with the national housing strategy, Quebec has received more than $5 billion to build or renovate thousands of housing units. We will continue to work with the Government of Quebec, particularly on the third round of the rapid housing initiative that we have just come to an agreement on with the province.
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 2:48:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the most recent report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer confirms that the Prime Minister's new fuel regulations are regressive and that lower-income households will pay proportionally more than higher-income households.
However, the Prime Minister's website says that the Liberals will cut taxes for the middle class, while asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a bit more.
Since the Prime Minister does not know how to tell the truth, can he explain to single mothers in Quebec why this new tax is going to cost them so much?
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 5:23:20 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry if my colleague did not like my speech on mushrooms, which are a very important source of copper. That is something I did not know a week ago.
I want to come back to the topic of leadership and courage in Bill S‑5. The question is, why did the government have the courage to create and consider a bill similar to the Government of Quebec? The answer is in the question. It is right there. It is the same thing in British Columbia. The provincial governments, in every case, take a position of leadership and courage.
It is important that provinces take a leadership position, and governments like those in Quebec and B.C. have done that in environmental causes and many others.
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
