44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 19, 2023 10:00AM
- Oct/19/23 3:22:20 p.m.
- Watch
I concur with the sentiment behind that idea. It is very important for all of the parties to work together, behind the scenes, if possible, on unanimous consent requests.
The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable for the Thursday question. This being my first Thursday question as Speaker, I must say that I am eager to hear it.
62 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/19/23 3:22:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have to admit you are putting a little pressure on me to produce a Thursday question that lives up to this House's reputation.
During Oral Questions, there were a lot of questions about Bill C‑56 and comments by government ministers about the Conservative Party's decision to support or oppose it. They urged us to support it. I would note that the government has not put Bill C‑56 on the House's agenda since October 5. I actually have an excellent speech ready about my position on Bill C‑56.
I would therefore like to ask the Leader of the Government if a discussion of Bill C‑56 is planned for next week's House business so that I can finally deliver my speech.
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/19/23 3:23:57 p.m.
- Watch
I congratulate the member for Mégantic—L'Érable on meeting my expectations for my first Thursday question.
The hon. Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.
32 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/19/23 3:24:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member will be very happy with my answer.
I hope that happiness will result in him supporting Bill C‑56 and not just giving a speech about it. The bill is good for Quebeckers and Canadians.
Tomorrow, we will begin second reading debate of Bill C-38, which deals with new registration entitlements. I am sure my colleague is very interested to hear that, on Monday, we will debate Bill C-56, the affordable housing and groceries act. On Tuesday and Wednesday, we will call Bill C-57, the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement implementation act, which was introduced earlier this week.
Thursday, we will proceed with report stage and third reading of Bill C-34, concerning the Investment Canada Act. I assume that my hon. colleague is very happy with this news, and I look forward to hearing his speech on Monday.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/19/23 3:26:00 p.m.
- Watch
I thank the hon. member for raising that issue. In fact, before the hon. member took his feet, I had actually signalled to the Sergeant-at-Arms to ask members outside to keep the conversation low.
36 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I am now ready to rule on the point of order raised on Thursday, September 21, by the member for Bay of Quinte concerning Bill C-339 and Bill C-56.
Bill C-339, an act to amend the Competition Act (efficiencies defence), standing in the name of the member for Bay of Quinte, received first reading on June 8 and was added to the order of precedence on September 20. Bill C-56, an act to amend the Excise Tax Act and the Competition Act, received first reading on Thursday, September 21, and is currently being debated in the House at second reading.
In his intervention, the member for Bay of Quinte noted that the government had presented a bill which contains the same provisions as his private member's bill. The member sought assurance from the Chair that, if required, he would have recourse to replace his bill with another item according to the provisions of the Standing Orders.
The parliamentary secretary to the government House leader countered that it would be premature to consider the matter until the Subcommittee on Private Members’ Business and the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs had completed their work pursuant to Standing Order 91.1 and presented a report to the House.
Bill C‑339 contains only two clauses, which are identical to clauses 9 and 10 of Bill C‑56. Bill C-339 seeks to repeal the provision of the Competition Act setting out the “efficiencies defence”, which prevents the Competition Tribunal from making an order if it finds that the likely gains in efficiency will be greater than the effects of any lessening of competition resulting from a merger.
Bill C-56 aims to repeal the exception brought about by mergers involving efficiency gains, while also establishing a framework to conduct an inquiry, permitting the Competition Tribunal to make certain orders, as well as amending the Excise Tax Act.
It is my understanding that the Subcommittee on Private Members’ Business held a meeting on Thursday, October 5, to determine whether the bills added to the order of precedence on September 20 should remain votable or not. While the subcommittee and the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs have not yet made a final recommendation to the House concerning Bill C-339, the official process has not yet run its course. It would therefore be premature for the Chair to make any determination on this matter at this time.
There is an opportunity to resolve the concern raised through the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business and the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, which are the designated bodies for considering items added to the order of precedence. I trust that the usual process will be followed in accordance with the rules and practices of the House. If a procedural issue remains after that process is complete, the Chair is open to considering the matter.
I thank all members for their patience and attention.
503 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The Chair would also like to make a statement on the management of Private Members' Business. The consideration of legislative measures involves certain procedural issues of a constitutional nature that impose constraints that the Speaker and the members must address.
As a consequence, every time the order of precedence is replenished, the Chair reviews the bills added to draw the House's attention to those that appear, at first glance, to infringe the financial prerogative of the Crown. This enables members to rise in a timely manner to present their views on whether these bills require a royal recommendation.
Accordingly, following the addition of 15 new items to the order of precedence on Wednesday, September 20, two items concern the Chair.
First, Bill C-353, an act to provide for the imposition of restrictive measures against foreign hostage takers and those who practice arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations and to make related amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, standing in the name of the member for Thornhill.
Also: Bill C‑356, an act respecting payments by Canada and requirements in respect of housing and to amend certain other acts, standing in the name of the member for Carleton.
In the Chair's view, these bills may require a royal recommendation. Members who wish to make arguments regarding the need for bills C‑353 and C‑356 to be accompanied by a royal recommendation should do so as early as possible.
I thank all members for their attention.
265 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, before, I talked about the consultations that informed us, and part of the consultations helped us determine that we would come up with the interim sustainable jobs plan, which was released in February. It reflects what we heard from Canadians and includes 10 key initiatives within areas of federal responsibility.
One of those initiatives, which is also in this legislation, is setting up a sustainable jobs secretariat. Creating a secretariat like this is a proven international best practice that was repeatedly recommended to the government. Canada's secretariat would promote policy and program coherence across all the five-year sustainable job action plans that are mentioned in this act and in work related to issues such as skills development, the labour market, workplace rights, developing our economy and reducing emissions. It would ensure that the opinions of workers, industry, provinces and territories, indigenous and historically under-represented groups and others are considered in all work on sustainable jobs across different policies, programs and departments.
The secretariat would also help in preparing and tracking the progress on the action plans, coordinating federal-provincial work related to the plans and providing policy and administrative support to the sustainable jobs partnership council, another initiative from the interim plan.
This legislation commits to establishing the sustainable jobs partnership council, which would provide advice to the government on the best measures to include in the action plans. The partnership council would be made up of sustainable jobs experts and would engage directly with Canadian workers, including those from rural and remote communities. This would ensure that they have a voice in the process. They would also engage with labour groups, indigenous groups, industries, trade associations, employers and different levels of government.
The council members would draw from their personal experience and expertise and give input to us, so we could engage in a process to formulate advice about the concrete measures government could take to support workers, their communities and the low-carbon economy. The partnership council would publish annual reports that include advice for the government, which would also help inform the five-year plans. The interim sustainable jobs plan that was released earlier this year is very important. It is a model for these five-year plans, and I can assure everyone that we are taking great action.
There is a lot to discuss, and I look forward to debate about supporting workers through investments and the union training and innovation program, UTIP, which focuses on sustainable jobs and supports up to 20,000 new apprentices and journeypersons.
We are investing in workers, people and communities across this great country. We are going to get the job done.
447 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have the opportunity to speak about this flawed bill once again.
The member spoke a fair bit about possible jobs, but nowhere in this bill does it talk about that. He talked about some of the issues and, in particular, one was transitioning. Transitioning from our current energy system is not merely a matter of flipping a switch, which is what the member and this legislation seem to indicate. We cannot just flip a switch to make this happen. We need to make certain that steps are taken.
The people who are doing that hard work and doing those hard jobs today, whether they are coal miners, pipefitters or involved in sequestration, are creating those jobs. These people would not be sitting at the table of this 15-member committee that the government would be forming.
Could the member comment on how we can assure these people are there, not somebody who was signed up to represent them?
164 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, this whole sustainable jobs action plan is about workers, as is the legislation before us. It is about engaging labour. It is having workers at the table with us, along with industry, indigenous groups and communities at all different levels.
I had an opportunity to travel across this great country last year and speak with a number of people. I spoke with Russ Shewchuk, vice-president of the IBEW in Saskatchewan. He stated, “Through this legislation, the Government is showing their commitment to protecting good-paying, highly skilled jobs.” That is just one example of many different labour groups that are supporting this legislation.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for giving me another opportunity to speak to Bill C‑50, which I gave a speech about a few days ago.
I would like to ask my Liberal colleague a question. How is it that this bill was drafted without taking into account the existing job training agreements between Ottawa and Quebec?
These agreements have been around for 25 years. How can the government come up with a bill without taking into account Quebec's reality?
84 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, there were 18 months of consultations with a variety of levels of government, workers, industry representatives and indigenous groups. It was really critical, and it formed the legislation we have put forward here today.
I used to work for the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities in Sault Ste. Marie, which is a provincial group. We were funded by the federal government through labour market agreements, which Quebec is funded through as well. I know they are critically important for the skills and training that are needed today.
This legislation is going to go further than that. It would provide a plethora of training and opportunities for the workers of today and tomorrow.
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we just saw Danielle Smith chase $33 billion of clean energy investment out of Alberta for ideology. We have seen the Conservatives get up day after day to ridicule investments in the battery plants on Highway 401.
The member represents steelworkers. I represent miners. I do not know anybody who would chase investment away or ridicule a plan that would make sure the workers are at the table. I also do not know anybody who would think that, with what is happening in the United States with the Biden administration and the complete transformation of its economy, we could sit by the side of the road defending a 20th century industry for ideological reasons.
Why does the hon. member think the Conservatives are so dead set against getting our economy into a 21st century mode?
137 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I do not know that I can answer the member for Timmins—James Bay's question on behalf of the Conservatives.
I recognize exactly what he is saying because, yes, I do represent steelworkers in a steel town, and that is part of the supply chain. We are going from coal to electric cars, which is like taking a million cars off the road, but that goes hand-in-glove with the investments we are making in electric batteries. The market is starting to dictate this, as well as the government.
We are working to get ahead of the curve, and this is going to make sure that we have good-paying jobs today and tomorrow.
119 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's contribution with respect to Bill C-50 was really informative and interesting.
First of all, I would be remiss if I did not mention that I am speaking today on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.
Bill C-50 has been circulating within this country for the last 18 months or longer. It has been a topic of conversation for industry, experts, unions, workers, provinces, territories, committees, think tanks and task forces. This is not something that the government all of a sudden brought to the House of Commons. A tremendous amount of energy, support and careful thought have been invested into developing Bill C-50.
We know that Canadians and the rest of the world are investing toward a low-carbon economy. We are taking our lead from climate experts, from businesses and financial leaders, and from employment and labour specialists. These are people who work in the net-zero economy, who work in the energy sector today and are looking to where they would be working in the energy sector in the future. They want to grow with these opportunities and be a part of launching Canada into being a leader in a net-zero economy. They do not want to be on the sidelines and they do not want to be left behind. They want to be front and centre, and they want to be a part of this movement.
They all agree that the global transition to net zero has the potential to help drive Canada's continued prosperity toward well-paying, high-quality jobs for many generations to come. This is not just for this year, next year or the next five years, but future decades in Canada for which this would have an impact.
We are also taking our cue from the tens of thousands of Canadians who participated in these public consultations. They made sure their voices were heard. They gave us very critical and needed insight and perspectives into where those skills and trades are today, where they see them going in the future, and most important, how they would be included and play a role. That includes representatives from rural and remote communities, as well as from unions, indigenous groups, industry, provinces and territories. All of the stakeholders have participated in bringing forward the legislation before the House today, and that, in itself, speaks volumes as to where Canadians are today in a net-zero economy and the energy transition.
One of the most important conclusions drawn from these engagements was that, for an energy powerhouse such as Canada, there will be an overall increase in jobs for Canadians. As we continue to diversify our energy mix to include more clean and non-emitting energy resources, many of the experts and pundits are even predicting that we will have more new jobs than we will have workers to fill them.
That is a familiar story for Canadians today. The government's sustainable jobs plan is specifically intended to help address these challenges by working to grow the size of our labour force to include more youth, new Canadians, under-represented groups and others who want to participate in this economy in Canada.
We have already made historic investments. This is not new for us as a government. We have been making investments to build a stronger and more inclusive diverse labour force, including, for example, the work that we are doing for a sectoral workforce solutions program. This is nearly $1 billion in investments to help keep economic and low-carbon sectors current and ensure that their workforce is emerging, that it is a workforce that is needed and that we are meeting the demands.
We have put $55 million into the community workforce development program. This was to help communities connect with employers, with workers and with future jobseekers to determine where these skilled trades are going to be and how they prepare for them. For someone who is coming out of school today, where are those clean tech, net-zero economy jobs going to be in 24 months, four years or six years?
We are way ahead of the game on what needs to be done for workers in Canada to make this transition. Of course, we have many other programs, some that are supporting indigenous organizations, industry employers and a number of them supporting the Canadian labour market.
I come from an energy producing province, a province that has found its wealth in the oil and gas sector. Now we are seeing new opportunities on the horizon for hydrogen development, wind development, solar power development and tidal power development. We are seeing an opportunity before us today that a decade ago we did not even think was possible. We know it is the future for our economy. As a province, we know we need to move where the trends and new jobs are going to be, those new revenues. If we are to have a sustainable economy in Canada, we need to be prepared to make this transition.
We are not only an oil and gas producing province; Newfoundland and Labrador is a major generator of clean energy. Did we lose jobs because we went from diesel generation to the largest hydro development projects in the country? Absolutely not. We imported jobs by the thousands to do those developments, to build those projects. Now we are sustaining hundreds of more jobs in those sectors. This is not something new. Just like when we made transitions 30 years ago, we are making transitions today.
What I do not understand is why the Conservatives are not supporting the transition to a net-zero economy, knowing it is going to bring sustainable economic development and good jobs for Canadians who want to work in all regions of Canada and for those who want to be able to stay at home and have a well-paying job.
In fact, I was amazed when I looked at some of the reports and studies that were done. One was by Clean Energy Canada, a think-tank based out of Simon Fraser University. It talked about the number of new jobs that would be created in the clean energy sector alone, about 3.4% every year over the next decade. We are talking about increasing jobs by 46% in sectors like hydrogen and clean electricity. These are not small numbers. These are hundreds of thousands of new jobs for Canadians who will be graduates of high schools and college programs. Not only that, it is coming at a time when we are seeing a lot of skilled workers in the energy sector retiring and leaving the industry.
It is a great time to be proactive in Canada, and that is what our government is doing. Bill C-50 is the benchmark for those things to happen. I can guarantee, from a province which is now excited about hydrogen and offshore wind, as well as from other regions of Atlantic Canada that are moving forward with projects like this as well, that we are not only seeing the thousands of jobs that come with it, but seeing a sustainable, tremendous future for Atlantic Canada, for Newfoundland and Labrador in sectors like this. It gives us hope and optimism that we have not had for a long time.
We are getting a clean environment, a net-zero economy, great jobs and are giving Canadians an opportunity to stay and work at home. I do not see any reason anyone would vote against that in the House of Commons.
1269 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask my colleague basically the same kinds of questions I asked her colleague earlier. In the opinion of the officials who presented Bill C‑50 to us, Quebec's specific situation was not considered at any point in the process of drafting this bill.
We can do something about that, however. We can do better. We suggest that the government introduce an element of asymmetry into Bill C‑50 that would make it compatible with the Canada-Quebec agreements.
I do not expect my colleague to say yes and agree with me. However, I would like to know whether she can commit to defending this idea within her caucus.
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is important for all Canadians to feel that their voices are heard.
Through this process, we not only had consultations with all provinces and territories, but we also had consultations with indigenous groups, labour unions and industry, representing thousands of Quebeckers in that process. Their voices were very strong in terms of the input they had into the legislation and how they see Bill C-50 rolling out. Most importantly, their voices were strong in how they see themselves in what would happen in the clean economy and in the transition to new energy developments across Canada and to a net-zero economy.
Quebec has a major role to play in that, as my colleague would agree. We are looking forward to having their support and the support of the people of their province to ensure that they, too, would have the opportunities afforded through a clean economy and clean energy economy into the future.
158 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, like the member opposite, I, too, want to recognize how much natural resources have contributed to Canada's wealth.
Canada's oil and gas companies, right now, are making out like bandits. They have never seen profits so high, but what are they doing with that wealth? They are doing stock buybacks and dividend payouts. We are literally seeing the wealth of Canada flow through our fingers. It is certainly not going to workers.
We have to be like Wayne Gretzky. We have to be going to where the puck is going. There a narrative shift going on. We have to transition to a 21st-century economy.
I am very appreciative of the fact that the member for Timmins—James Bay was able to strengthen this legislation so workers and the unions that represent them would be a big part of this conversation. Could my hon. colleague across the way comment on just how important it is that the voice of labour be central to the conversation and to the legislation going forward?
176 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member referenced his colleague from Timmins—James Bay. I sat on a committee with him, and we studied this issue. I know that he is passionate about this, in terms of the role that workers would play in Canada in transitioning to a clean economy.
I certainly hope they will support Bill C-50, knowing what it means for Canadians generally, not just in how we reach that net-zero economy but also in how we strengthen it going forward in resource development and how we strengthen jobs for so many Canadians who need those good-paying skilled jobs that they could have right in their own communities and regions.
I am excited about what Bill C-50 would allow us to do in Canada. It would allow us to lead the way to a clean economy that we have rarely seen in any generation. We are a part of making this happen, and my guess is that, if they are passionate about this, they should get on board and make it happen, not sit on the sidelines and just be critical of it. It is going to happen with or without them. If we take an active role, we can make this work, stronger and better, for Canadians.
213 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
