SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 235

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 19, 2023 10:00AM
  • Oct/19/23 10:19:08 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to one petition. This return will be tabled in an electronic format.
35 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 10:31:52 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.
14 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 11:04:22 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Mr. Speaker, I am wondering whether the member could provide an explanation of how important it is that the government be able to pass legislation. It would appear, based on yesterday's filibuster, that the Conservatives do not want the legislation passed. Without time allocation, we will not be able to get it passed. Could the member give his perspective as to why it is so important that we get this passed?
72 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to Bill C-50. I am never surprised when I see the Conservative tactics, whether it is on Bill C-50 or Bill C-49. However, Canadians are telling us, as parliamentarians, what issues are important to them, one being jobs. Jobs are so critically important. Canadians from coast to coast to coast want to know what the Canadian and provincial governments are putting into place so that we have good middle-class jobs well into the future. Whether it was Bill C-49 or now Bill C-50, the Government of Canada, in co-operation, in good part, with other parties, although not the Conservative Party, has been able to get important legislation through. As someone said to me, the word that comes to mind when we think of the Conservative Party nowadays, especially if one reflects on its behaviour and the types of things it does to prevent legislation like this from passing, is “reckless”. The Conservative Party of Canada does not know where it is going. Canadians would be taking a chance, very much a risk, with the Conservative Party today, because it is so reckless in the policies and decisions it makes. We seem to see that more often. The longer the Conservative leader, with the Conservative caucus, focuses on making these policy decisions, people should be concerned. They should be concerned about those middle-class jobs and where the Conservative Party wants to take the country. Another issue is the environment. This legislation deals specifically with the environment and the need for us to be in a position to build a healthy, strong, net-zero economy, something with which most parties in the chamber are in sync. They understand that this is also a priority of Canadians. Canadians are concerned about the global environment and what is taking place in Canada today. The number of forest fires, storms and floods have a direct correlation to our environment. Canadians are aware of that. The government brought forward legislation a few years back on targets to get us to net zero. I believe Canadians can get behind this type of legislation and support it. Today, Bill C-50 not only talks about that net-zero economy of the future; it also talks about the issue of jobs and transition, ensuring that we have strong healthy middle-class jobs well into the future. Clean energy is being looked at in a very serious way around the world today. Where is the Conservative Party? I made reference to the word “reckless” and we should maybe emphasize that fact. At the end of the day, we saw where the Conservative Party was when it voted against the Atlantic accord. An hon. member: Because it is unconstitutional. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: They do not know what they are talking about. Liberal Atlantic caucus members stood up one after— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
494 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Speaker, we cannot make this stuff up. When I say that they are reckless, I am serious. Let us take a look at Bill C-49. The two bills, Bill C-50 and Bill C-49, are fairly close with respect to the environment and jobs. Many of my Atlantic colleagues in the Liberal caucus talked about Bill C-49 and how important it was for Atlantic Canada. A Progressive Conservative premier and Liberal premiers, from Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nova Scotia, talked about the importance of this legislation. We heard very clearly from Liberal members from Atlantic Canada. They stepped up and ensured that legislation would pass, because it was all about the future, energy transition and so forth. It was all about coastal waters and future billions of dollars of investment. Provinces were waiting to bring in mirror legislation, but needed Bill C-49 to pass. What did the Conservatives do? They were prepared to indefinitely filibuster that bill as well. They were prepared to say no to Atlantic Canada. I do not know what they have against Atlantic Canada. It did not matter whether the premier was a Progressive Conservative. After all, those members are the right of the right in the Conservative Party. If we had not brought in time allocation for Bill C-49, it would not have gone to committee. We had to bring in time allocation because the Conservatives made it very clear that they would debate it and debate it and never let it pass at second reading. Fast forward to today, and again we are talking about jobs and the environment. The title of Bill C-50 is the Canadian sustainable jobs act. The bill's focus is a on building net-zero economy and looking at jobs for the middle class well into the future. How are the Conservatives reacting to the legislation? I understand that there has been one day of debate. We were supposed to debate it yesterday. I was supposed to give my speech on this yesterday and I looked forward it. However, in the wisdom of the reckless Conservative Party of 2023, the Conservatives decided they did not want to debate it. Now we know why: This is yet another piece of legislation that the Conservatives do not want to see get out of second reading. We recognize that in the last election, Canadians made a decision for a minority government. Fortunately, we have other opposition parties that understand the value of passing legislation. That is the only reason we were able to generate the support that will ultimately see Bill C-50 pass, much to the demise and the disappointment of the Conservative Party of Canada. It is unfortunate. Thinking Bill C-50 and what it would do, I would be interested to know what is in the bill that is so offensive that the Conservative Party members do not want to see it pass. Marilyn Gladu: Wait for my speech. Kevin Lamoureux: The member says “Wait for my speech”, Mr. Speaker. I look forward to hearing what the member has to say. Let me highlight a few aspects of the bill and maybe the member can provide her thoughts on what I believe are three very positive things. Let us remember that through the legislation, we would establish a sustainable jobs partnership council. It is a committee of sorts. It could be up to, I believe, 15 members. The individuals who would be on that council, which would provide advice to the government, are as follows: business community leaders; labour representatives; representatives of regional interests, like the Atlantic community, and the impact of billions of dollars of potential development, which the Conservatives voted against; indigenous communities; and others who could potentially contribute to a healthy, educated and well-thought-out process. Why would the Conservative Party of Canada not support that? What do they have against having good ideas being brought forward to the government so it can be in a position to develop a report or take action? We will wait until the next Conservative speaker, who might say something positive about the council, but I will not hold my breath. Another thing the legislation would do is put in place a sustainable jobs action plan. I talked about the council and how every five years there would an action plan presented to the government, a five-year forecast with respect to what we could look at in the up and coming years ahead. The first report will come out in 2025, and that as a positive thing. The government is saying that it wants to share with Canadians a plan that can build confidence for industries, whether one is an investor or a young person who wants a sense of what direction to go in with respect to a career. What is wrong with having a five-year plan? Again, it as a positive thing. Another issue is the sustainable jobs secretariat. The government is bent on having a secretariat, which would make a significant difference. We would have an advisory council that generates ideas, a reporting mechanism and a secretariat to ensure there is some coordination and action taking place. That is also incorporated into the legislation. Again, that is a good thing. When I look at the legislation, the three things I just finished highlighting are the real basics of the framework that will make a positive difference. It will have a positive outcome for Canadians from coast to coast to coast. Back in the late winter of 2015, we said that this government's focus would be on Canada's middle class and those aspiring to be a part of it. When we stand and talk about future jobs, those jobs will support Canada's middle class and those who are aspiring to be a part of it. We are looking to build supports. Let us take a look at what happened yesterday when we brought forward the legislation for debate, which I believe would have been the second day of debate on it. That is when members opposite, including the member who said that she has something to say after me, would have had her opportunity to speak to this legislation. As she knows, that did not happen. Why did that not happen? Instead of talking about jobs, as I referred to yesterday, what members of the Conservative Party want to do is continue their personal attacks, something I have referenced as character assassinations. They believe that as long as they focus on character assassinations, while staying away from the issues, that is all Canadians will focus on. That is what they push. All one needs to do is look at what they actually did yesterday. Instead of talking about jobs, they brought forward a motion for a concurrence report. When someone brings in such a motion, what they typically want to see is the House pass a report by having a vote, so that we will, in essence, agree to it. That is usually the desire. However, then they moved an amendment to have the standing committee deal with it. Colleagues can see the relevance of this very quickly, because the motion to defer it to a committee could have been done in a standing committee. Members could have raised the amendment and tried to put that on the agenda of a standing committee, but they chose not to do that. Why did they choose not to do that? It was because Bill C-50 and those points that I just finished highlighting were not debated. Instead, we talked about the concurrence report amendment. As a result, we never had the debate on this. We can fast-forward to today. The government now brings in time allocation and says that there is a limit to the amount of debate on this bill. I am sure we are going to hear comments from the other side during the debate in terms of how the government is trying to limit debate. In reality, those individuals who are following the debate, looking at the Conservative Party of Canada's behaviour on legislation in general, will find that, when the Conservative Party opposes legislation, it has no intention to pass the legislation. It does not take much. I could take a dozen grade 12 students from Sisler or Maples high school in my community, R. B. Russell or Children of the Earth, and I could prevent legislation from passing if they were members of Parliament. We would just have to put them up to speak. We all know there is a limit to the amount of time for speech, so all someone has to do is put up one speaker after another and then maybe move an amendment. They can repeat that and it will never get voted on, unless of course a closure motion or time allocation is brought in. The Conservatives were very clear yesterday. Prior to that I honestly did not know how they were going to be voting on Bill C-50. Now I have come to believe they are going to be voting against it. That is one of the motivating reasons that they did not want the debate to occur yesterday. The government only has so many hours of debate in any given week. We can take a look at the number of times that the Conservatives have tried to kill that time, as much as they can. We can look at the times when opposition members have stood up to move that so and so be heard, and then they cause the bells to ring, to prevent debate on government bills. We can look at the times they have tried to adjourn the House, again in an attempt to prevent debate. We can look at the times they denied the House sitting until midnight when the government wanted to provide more time for debate—
1664 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:13:27 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, first of all, the member is wrong when he says that we did nothing with regard to jobs during the pandemic. We could talk about the wage subsidy program, the loans to small businesses and the rental supports, not to mention CERB—
45 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:13:50 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, the Government of Canada spent billions of dollars having the backs of Canadians and protecting against the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs during the pandemic, so the member is wrong on that point. The member is also wrong in his assessment of the legislation. There are many things within it to ensure that we have a good transition. Whether the Conservatives like it or not, at the end of the day, there will be a transition period. They might have to be dragged screaming and kicking into the new world. We, as a government, believe there is a role for the government to ensure that this transition takes place in such a way that middle-class jobs, which are important for the future in Canada, are going to be there.
134 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:15:53 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, I acknowledge the member's comments at the beginning of her question. Yes, the government is only able to do what it is doing today with respect to this bill because we were able to get support from the New Democratic Party in getting the bill to committee. Canadians will benefit as a direct result. The Prime Minister, along with other ministers, such as my colleague from Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, the Minister of Northern Affairs, travel up north a great deal. The council membership would take into consideration things such as indigenous communities and different regions of the country. The member is right: There are so many opportunities across Canada in terms of the energy transition and good-quality jobs for all regions of the country.
130 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:17:20 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, I am not the one who actually gets to appoint the members to the council, but I believe that having the first report presented to Canadians in 2025 is the responsible thing to do. We have to create the council, and I think it would be premature to present a report before providing the council the opportunity to work with the different regions, to have the different stakeholders sit around the table and have those healthy discussions that are going to be important. This is the type of council that is going to play a critical role, in terms of the type of direction we are going to be going in, as a government, to continue to support some fantastic initiatives, whether they are tide waters in Atlantic Canada, electric batteries in the province of Ontario, hydro in Manitoba or the potential in the north and on the Pacific coast.
152 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:19:23 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, the member raises a good point. I would like to emphasize one aspect, which is that if we take a look over the last number of years, prepandemic, what was created by the government working with the different stakeholders, Canadians, small and big businesses alike, was somewhere in the neighbourhood of just over a million jobs generated. That would be from 2016 to prepandemic. Then, because of the support programs and working with a team Canada approach, we were among the fastest countries in terms of restore the jobs that were lost during the pandemic. The government has been very much focused on job creation. This legislation would even go further than that. It would recognize that, as we get closer to that net-zero economy, we need to focus a lot more attention on the types of jobs of the future. That is why we are creating the council and having the secretariat. That is why there is a need for the strategic plan, and this is a government that is going to get the job done.
180 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:21:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, it is a bit much, hearing from the Conservatives about our not having a plan when we are still waiting for Conservative policy on the environment. I remember the plan Conservatives had on the price on pollution, which they call the carbon tax. I have highlighted it before. That was their plan, and they advertised it to every Canadian. It was their election platform, where they said that they supported a price on pollution. Do members remember that plan? What has happened to it? Today, the Conservative Party, en masse, has had a conversion. They now say that they do not support a price on pollution. The only consistency is that the Conservative Party continues in a reckless fashion, and people need to be aware. People are taking a risk when they talk to the Conservatives. If they want to focus on growing Canada's middle class, they can take a look at what Bill C-50 would do: It would create opportunities for good solid middle-class jobs well into the future.
175 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:32:10 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, I feel very confident in knowing that the Prime Minister and every Liberal member of Parliament understands and has complete faith in the CPP, the Canada pension plan. I have a question for the member opposite, who is the finance critic. What is the Conservative Party of Canada's position in regard to what the Premier of Alberta is talking about in terms of getting Alberta out of the CPP? The member made reference to the CPP. Will the Conservatives be straightforward and transparent with what their position is in regard to the CPP and Alberta?
98 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 12:47:30 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, talk about manipulating numbers to try to make something look like what it is not. The member talked about, for example, LNG. It is one of the single largest investments, possibly in the top four or five, where we saw the federal government working with a provincial government, the NDP in B.C. It was us, the provincial NDP and the private sector working on an LNG project worth billions of dollars, yet the member just said we had nothing to do with LNG. The member talked about hundreds of thousands of jobs. Our government has created far more jobs than Stephen Harper ever did, and we have been in government for eight years compared to nine years. We do not need to be lectured about jobs. Why does the Conservative Party not recognize the value of the transition to ensure that we have good, healthy net-zero workforce jobs into the future for Canada's middle class? What does the member have against Canada's middle-class jobs?
171 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 1:33:18 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, in one word, wow. At the end of the day, it is becoming very clear that the Conservative Party does not give a darn about green jobs. The Conservatives do not recognize that there is value to green jobs. The Conservatives are prepared to write off Canada's middle class and those aspiring to be a part of it when it comes to good-quality green jobs. This bill is all about ensuring there is a council that can provide that five-year report on how we can transition and generate additional jobs. Let us think about the battery jobs from Volkswagen and other types of jobs. This is about tomorrow. Why do the Conservatives want to close their eyes or bury their heads in the sand like an ostrich? It does not make any sense. What do you have against good, clean middle-class jobs?
148 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 1:48:31 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Madam Speaker, talk about reckless. Let me give a good example. The member is criticizing investments we have made in electric vehicles, and she is happy to do so. The Government of Canada entered into an agreement with Volkswagen, creating thousands of jobs, directly and indirectly. Industries will grow as a direct result. VW is investing billions of dollars, and the member is saying that VW does not know what it is doing, apparently, and the jobs that are being created in St. Thomas and the surrounding areas are just not worth it because the reckless Conservative Party believes that electric vehicles are not a thing of the future. How ridiculous is that? Can the member tell the people of St. Thomas whether the Conservative Party supports the VW plant, which is going to be the largest plant in Canada? Some 200 football fields could fit into it.
148 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 2:00:22 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it is important we recognize that Canada's diversity is one of our greatest strengths. I reflect back to June, when we celebrated many different events of Canada's Filipino Canadian heritage. Now we fast-forward to November. On November 12, we are going to be celebrating Diwali. Diwali is celebrated from coast to coast to coast, as Canada's Indo-Canadian community will lead the way. Diwali is a celebration of good over evil, light over darkness and knowledge over ignorance. This is a part of Canadian heritage. We should all be very proud of Canada's diversity. For those who are going to be celebrating Diwali on November 12, I wish each and every one of them a very happy Diwali.
125 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 3:25:38 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. At times the issue of decorum inside the chamber is raised, but I have also found that there has been quite a bit of noise outside of the chamber. For example, as the government House leader was providing a response, clapping was taking place. There seems to be, at times, a constant level of noise. I just want to reinforce the importance of trying to keep it quiet outside of the chamber too.
82 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Speaker, I think of Bill C-49 and Bill C-50. Bill C-49 had phenomenal support, not only from the House of Commons but also from the premiers in Atlantic Canada. It was all about renewable energy and future clean, green jobs. There are literally hundreds of thousands of potential jobs from there to Bill C-50, and we recognize the future. There is a need to develop, promote and encourage those green jobs. However, the Conservatives, as they voted against Bill C-49, are now going to be voting against Bill C-50. The member often makes reference to climate change deniers. Why does he feel the Conservatives are challenging these good, futuristic middle-class jobs that are going to be there today and tomorrow?
128 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 5:18:27 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-50 
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member has read the legislation, which has within it the creation of a council. That council, I believe, would be around 15 members. Within that council there would be appointments of different forms of stakeholders, everything from leading industrial personnel to labour representatives and other types of stakeholders who could really contribute to the development of that strategy. This would ultimately lead to a report on a five-year basis, the first one appearing in 2025. Does that not fit many of the things the member was talking about in terms of having a strategy and looking to get the expertise coming forward? That, in essence, is what the legislation would do. It would ensure that Canada continues to generate good-quality middle-class jobs well into the future, dealing with green energy jobs.
140 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/19/23 5:46:40 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded vote please.
8 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border