44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 8, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/8/23 10:24:49 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the members of the Bloc Québécois for the motion they have introduced in the House today. I want to congratulate them on bringing forward a motion of substance that genuinely calls on the government to do something meaningful within its realm of possibility.
I want to express that I plan to vote in favour of this motion, not only because it is well crafted, but also because it is a motion on something we should be calling upon the government to do.
When we talk about the government investing in fossil fuels, I think it is important that we do not invest in the creation, exploitation or extraction of fossil fuels. However, I believe there is still work for the government to do with dealing with abandoned oil wells, for example.
Could the leader of the Bloc confirm that the motion is attempting to distinguish between investing in fossil fuels from an extraction perspective and dealing with abandoned oil wells and other impacts from previous fossil fuels extraction?
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 10:40:49 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know that the last clause of the motion specifically speaks to incentivizing renewable energies, and Quebec has an incredible track record in terms of its renewable energy program.
Some initiatives that have come out of Quebec relate to using government tools and resources to properly incentivize the renewable energy sector. Could the member comment on initiatives from Quebec that the rest of the country can benefit from?
70 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 12:11:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, to have these conversations, we need to find common ground and we need to deal in facts. For example, I find common ground with NDP members when they talk about not subsidizing the fossil fuel industry. I think perhaps we need to more aggressively implement those reductions. I also think we have to accept the facts, and some of the facts the NDP is presenting are slightly misleading. The reality is that GHG emissions in Canada went down by 9% between 2019 and 2021. That is second best in the G7. It also happened, and this is very important, while our economy continued to grow, as we may get comments that there was a pandemic at that time.
I am wondering if the member would like to reflect on the fact that we are making serious moves forward. Our GHG emissions have gone down, and we have been second best in the G7 over the last two years despite our economic growth.
164 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 12:13:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I addressed that fallacy in my question.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 1:27:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I indicated earlier, I think that this is a good motion. I plan to vote in favour of it, as I hope many people in this House will.
I recognize that towards the end of the motion, the Bloc specifically calls on the government to promote the use of renewable energy and public transit. There are a number of initiatives that are already ongoing with respect to both of those. I am wondering if the member from the Bloc can comment specifically on what more he thinks should be done as it relates to promoting renewable energy and public transit. What more could the federal government do?
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 1:47:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the Bloc for introducing this motion today, which I plan to support. More importantly, I want to thank the member for Cariboo—Prince George for his last question. I do not particularly agree with everything he said, but I want to thank him for addressing the issue of what is going on in this country right now.
In the short time he took asking that question, he spoke more about the forest fires going on in this country than the Leader of the Opposition did in his four-hour stunt last night when he was supposedly filibustering. The Leader of the Opposition took the floor of the House of Commons last night to fundraise, or to speak to the issue of our budget, and he went on for four hours talking about Henry VIII, Winston Churchill and the stonework in this room. He never once mentioned the fires going on outside in the four hours he spent speaking about whatever he spoke about last night.
I thank the member for Cariboo—Prince George for standing up and speaking about it and being passionate about it. We do not see eye to eye on whether or not this government has done anything. That is fine and I respect that. However, he is speaking to the issue and he cares about the issue and that means something to the debate in this place, in my opinion.
There is also another narrative out there, based on comments made in this House and what we are seeing coming out of Conservative Party conventions, that Conservatives do not believe humans created climate change. We do not have to go back and dig up quotes from years ago. We do not need to find some dark corner of a Conservative convention, where there is a conspiracy going on that humans have nothing to do with climate change and this is a narrative we need to project. We do not have to do any of that. All we have to do is look at Hansard, the official record of this place, from last week, when the member for Red Deer—Mountain View referred to the climate discussions as “60 years of catastrophic snake oil salesmen” predictions. He said:
Things change; the climate changes. That is how we got our rivers. I know I deal with the effects of climate change right now when I have to go out into my field and pick rocks, because that is how they got there. These are the sorts of things we have to realize. Things do change.
This is from the official record of this House of Commons from last week. Anybody can find it. We can find it in Hansard and we can find the video of it. It exists.
I am quite often perplexed, and I find myself in a different position when I listen to people like the member for Cariboo—Prince George, who spoke passionately and who I hope attributes what is going on in our country to climate change. I try to reconcile that with the colleagues he sits in this House with, who talk about the discussion of climate change over the last 60 years as 60 years of “snake oil salesmen”.
It is so incredibly difficult for me to reconcile that. How does one sit in a political party with somebody who has such strongly opposing views on whether humans created and contributed to the effects of climate change? I never in a million years, when I ran in 2015, thought I would come to this place and have to debate basic science and what scientists have proven to be the case, but I do that. When I come here, I am faced with comments coming from the other side of the House that suggest climate change is just part of the cycles: We were under a kilometre of ice 10,000 years ago, which he also referenced, and now we are not, and one day we will be again and this is just the way the planet works. I am really confused and find it very perplexing that those in the Conservative Party can have such opposing views on humanity's participation in climate change, but, nonetheless, here we are.
With respect to the motion, I agree with everything the Bloc put forward. I am very pleased to see it come forward with this motion, because I do not think it lacks significance. I do not think it is a light, fluffy motion that just calls on the government to do something that perhaps the government is already doing. It calls on the government to be more ambitious and more aggressive, and I think that is important. That is the responsibility of an opposition party, and it is being taken seriously.
Having said that, we did have a few motions earlier in the winter, which I believe my parliamentary secretary colleague referenced recently, come forward from the Bloc about the prayer we have. I found those to be interesting and oddly timed, but, nonetheless, this is an important one. It calls on the government to do better and to do more in dealing with fossil fuel subsidies specifically.
Fossil fuel subsidies, in my opinion, need to be decreased as quickly as possible. I have said this in this House before. I have made my position on that known publicly at every opportunity that I get. I would encourage my government and the Minister of Environment to phase out fossil fuel subsidies as quickly as possible. I understand that the phase-out period is supposed to be around 2025 and I look forward to that, but if there is an opportunity to do it by 2024 or even this year, I would tell the government to do that and would encourage it to do that because it is the right thing to do. We should not be subsidizing an industry that is polluting so heavily our environment.
If we look at GHG emissions, we see that all sectors of the economy have been on a downward trend except the oil and gas sector. That is why it is important that we put in strong emissions caps, in my opinion, to reverse the trend on that and that we ensure there is legislation in place to incentivize and push that sector in the right direction so it can match all of the other sectors, such as transportation and home heating, that have been on a downward trend.
One thing I took issue with arose earlier today when I asked the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie a question. I said that when we look at the trajectory of our emissions, they have been going down. Between 2019 and 2021, they were on a downward trend.
Mr. Jeremy Patzer: What happened in those years, Mark?
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Mr. Speaker, I am going to get to that. I am going to say what happened in those years.
I specifically qualified my question by stating a falsehood that is continually repeated by the NDP and the Conservatives: What happened during that time? We had a pandemic. That is absolutely correct; we did. However, what else happened? Our economy continued to grow. Despite the fact that our economy continued to grow during the pandemic, emissions kept going down.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Mr. Speaker, in response to my question—
1250 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 1:56:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is nothing. Usually it is a lot worse.
I asked a question of the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie. His response, although he started talking about the pandemic, which I qualified in my question, he started to say yes, but that after the pandemic they started to go back up. That is not entirely true. As a matter of fact, he is using that same falsehood about the pandemic to justify his point, which is that they started to go back up since the end of the pandemic. However, since the beginning of the pandemic, 2019, they are still significantly lower.
When we come to this place, it is important that we deal in facts. We will have conversations about this, and I understand that my conversation will be interrupted in less than two minutes and I look forward to continuing after question period.
Having said that, I do respect the fact that the NDP, when it is presenting this, at least believes that climate change is real, and I genuinely appreciate that. I cannot believe I have to actually express that, because it is completely contrary to my Conservative colleagues, who do not seem to believe that climate change is real, especially when they come in here and talk about climate change and the discussion around climate change over the last 60 years as “snake oil salesmen”.
Why do I not read one more time, so it can really sink in before I am cut off, exactly what the member for Red Deer—Mountain View said. He said:
Things change; the climate changes. That is how we got our rivers. I know I deal with the effects of climate change right now when I have to go out into my field and pick rocks, because that is how they got there. These are the sorts of things we have to realize. Things do change.
I almost fell out of my seat when I heard the member say that last week, basically dismissing the participation of humans in climate change. Nothing could be further from the truth. We caused it and we have a responsibility to do something about it.
368 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 3:38:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, would members look at that? Two days ago, the Leader of the Opposition said that he was going to pull out every tool in the tool box to prevent the budget from being passed. I have been here since 2015, and I am pretty certain this is the earliest I have ever seen a budget get passed. I would encourage the member for Carleton, the Leader of the Opposition, to keep up his tactics, because it is certainly helping this side of the House get important pieces of legislation like the budget, which will help so many Canadians, through the House.
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 3:39:55 p.m.
- Watch
As we talk about this motion introduced by the Bloc today, I cannot help but reflect on what I was talking about prior to question period when I started my speech, and that is the absolute reluctance of Conservative members to agree that humans have caused climate change and that we have a role to play in addressing it.
I am reminded of a cartoon that I recently saw that was floating around on social media that shows forest fires burning and firefighters fighting those fires while a plane flies above with a banner off the back of it with the Conservative logo, “Scrap the carbon tax.” Conservatives are ready to burn the whole place down in the name of preserving our ability to extract fossil fuels from the ground. Even the Bloc Québécois, which they are partners with most of the time, the light blue, understands that climate change is a serious issue and we need to move quickly. We need to do more and push the government to do more at all times in order to properly combat the negative effects that we are seeing as a result of climate change and, quite frankly, prepare ourselves to be able to deal with them.
There is a lot that has already changed and a lot that we will not see reversed for generations to come. We have to understand that climate change is with us and that we have to be as prepared as we can be to deal with it in the best ways possible. However, that is not to say that we should throw up our hands and suggest that we should not be doing anything to prevent further disasters and further climate change from occurring. The Bloc Québécois, with this motion, is pushing the government, as it should, as a responsible opposition party, to do more and to do better.
I reference item (e) in its motion, which I am very much in support of. It states, “demand that the federal government stop investing in fossil fuels and develop incentives, while respecting the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces, to promote the use of renewable energy and public transit.” In response to that, I would say that we have done a significant amount, whether it is investing in public transit and, in particular, electric buses in transit systems throughout our country, investing in renewable energies or investing in electric vehicle technology and electric vehicle purchases by consumers. The federal government has been there, but that is not to say that we cannot do more; we must do more and we have to be asking the government at all times to do more about ensuring that we are taking this matter seriously.
When we talk about some of the specific investments, I am reminded of a company just outside of my riding of Kingston and the Islands, in the riding of Hastings—Lennox and Addington. The government formed a partnership with Umicore, a battery manufacturing facility, which will establish the largest battery manufacturing facility for electric vehicles in North America. This is a company that has a lot of history and has built similar facilities in other parts of the world. It is based out of Europe. It has expanded in Europe, and is now looking at markets outside Europe. It is looking at Canada.
One may ask why it is interested in Canada and not the United States. We are a relatively small economy compared to our neighbour, the United States, and there are other options in North America. Quite frankly, it chose Canada because it sees our commitment to sustainability. It sees our commitment to supporting the industry that it is part of. That is exactly what we need to be doing now.
Not only is the Bloc Québécois calling on the government to do more from an environmental perspective, but this motion is also asking the federal government to bolster the economy and have a stronger economy as it relates to renewable energy. This is absolutely critical at this point, as we heard the Minister of Environment say earlier. We are at the forefront of new technology. This is technology that is going to change not just Canada, but the world.
We have an option. We can either wait and let other countries develop it, import their technology and what they produce in years to come, or we can be at the forefront of it. We can develop those technologies here, we can harness the intellectual capability, intellectual patents and the ideas that come from people who are working on these projects. We can see them developed here, and then we become an exporter of that technology, selling it to the rest of the world.
Anybody who looks at macroeconomic policy would determine that the far superior way of approaching this is to become a leader in this. Of course, in order to do that, they have to believe that is the future. That is where the divide is in this House, at least as it relates to Conservatives versus every other party. Conservatives do not believe that the future is in those technologies. They believe that the future is in the continual extraction of oil and fossil fuels from underground so that they can be burned and used, and we would not have the opportunity to benefit from those incredible advancements that we are seeing in other parts of the world.
As I wrap up my speech, I again want to compliment the Bloc Québécois for bringing forward what I regard to be a substantive motion that is not light and fluffy and lacking a call to action, but indeed a motion that does call on the government to do more. That is what a responsible opposition party should be doing. I see that in this motion today and I am very happy to vote in favour of it when we ultimately vote on this next week.
1015 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 3:47:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member has not seen any EV-charging stations yet. Has he walked into the parking lot of West Block? There are three right there. Down in the parking lot in front of the Justice building and the Supreme Court, there are another eight charging stations. They were not here when I was elected in 2015 and now they are here. He does not see them. They are popping up all over the city. I ask him to open his eyes. They are literally everywhere.
Conservatives like to fearmonger about what is referred to as range anxiety, that people will not be able to get from a to b without their car dying. If they go into the province of Quebec, they literally could not put themselves in a scenario where there is not a charger available for them to fast-charge, very quickly. If they tried, they would not be able to do it because Quebec is so much further ahead than the rest of the country.
170 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 3:49:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do agree that this government could do that. We do need to take a reasonable, rational approach and we need to push the needle as far as we can. I am not personally in support of continuing the exploration, but I also think that what is more important is to create the right economic conditions that naturally, as we are seeing, so many of the large fossil fuel producers are just discovering, which is that the economics of it are not there anymore because the world is changing.
We are in a transition period now and, despite the fact that there might still be some interest in extraction and finding new areas to extract, I think, personally, that we are at a tipping point where we will very quickly start to see that decline. One in 10 cars sold in Canada was an electric vehicle. We are just at the chasm of the innovation curve where we will start to see it take off. At that point I do not think that there will be an interest to continue to explore for fossil fuels.
187 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 3:51:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am really glad to answer this question because it is similar to an exchange I had with the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie earlier, which was specifically about our emissions. The reality is that despite economic growth during the pandemic, our emissions went down by 9% between 2019 and 2021. The member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie earlier said that since the pandemic they have started going up. One cannot choose to use the bottom of the pandemic as a baseline if one is not going to accept the argument that they have come down since then.
The reality is that our emissions have not gone anywhere near where they were in 2019, despite that exchange that happened earlier. That is the reality of the situation. We have the second-best performance in the G7 for decreasing GHG emissions during that time period.
I think that we are doing our part. Can we do more? Absolutely. Does this motion call on the government to do more? Absolutely, and that is why I will vote in favour of it.
184 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 3:53:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is the reason I wholeheartedly support this motion. I will be honest with this member. I informed my whip before I knew that this party would be voting for it that I would be voting for it because I genuinely do not believe that we should be investing in fossil fuels. That is my own personal position. The sooner we can get to a point that we are not doing that, the better. I realize that the government is on track to get to that point by 2025, but if we can get to it by 2023, I would be even happier.
I support this motion. I personally am not in favour of continuing to prop up the fossil fuel industry. I do not think it is good for our environment. I know it is not. I do not think it is good for society as a whole.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 3:55:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I was teasing the member earlier. I always have a good exchange with him and I appreciate his question.
The reality of the situation is that I understand there is an affordability crisis out there. I understand that a lot of people are struggling. However, yesterday I got an email from my son's school that told us that kids would not be going outside for recess yesterday as a result of the smoke in the air. He is in grade 1. I do not ever remember that happening when I was a child. I do not want my children to grow up in a world where we have many days like what we had over the last couple of days.
Yes, the member is right. There are a lot of people struggling with affordability in particular right now, but we also have to do something about protecting our environment. This comes down to finding a balance. Where is that balance? I think, ultimately, that is where the struggle is.
172 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
