SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 298 - Apr/11/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Apr/11/24 1:09:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, could my colleague provide further thoughts regarding the benefits of the sustainable jobs action plan? We are talking about every five years, and there is a great deal of merit for that. I do not quite understand why the official opposition would see that as a bad thing. It is more of a longer-term plan that could have a positive outcome, when we start consulting with Canadian workers and others to ultimately come up with a plan. What does he think?

84 words

Mr. Mike Morrice

Apr/11/24 1:10:37 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North is right in that an action plan is a good thing. The concern is that it does not meet the moment we are in. Talking about an action plan, whether it is December 31, 2040, or whatever it ends up getting moved up to as a result of votes this evening, is not recognizing that we need investments today. We need action today. We need to talk about a just transition transfer today and a youth climate corps today. There is this idea of one day in the future writing an action plan that could have ideas in it that would have helped us if we had done it in 2024. That is the reality. Our kids are going to look back at this moment and ask what we were thinking. Yes, he is right that an action plan is a good thing. It is not nearly enough if it is some day far in the future, if we recognize we are in the midst of an emergency now.

176 words

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

Apr/11/24 1:11:34 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge the Greens for being honest about this bill. I would invite the member to expand, if he wants, on his thoughts. There was a previous just transition study, and the Liberals and the NDP changed the name of it at the last minute. However, as the member pointed out, the bill would not deliver any jobs or skills training programs, particularly. The member brought up the issue of trust, which is paramount, and it is certainly what Conservatives tried to embed in the legislation through our amendments. The Liberals even rejected a Conservative amendment that called for a fair and equitable approach specifically to ensure social support. The truth is that polls show that Conservatives do not know what the just transition is, but once they find out, they do not want it, they cannot afford it, they do not want new taxes to pay for it, and they want bigger polluters around the world to take action before Canadians are punished and it costs them even more. It would be great if the member would also recognize the fact that on Bill C-50, the legislation itself, because of the procedural tactics from the Liberals and NDP, not a single Canadian impacted by it will actually be able to be heard by members of Parliament.

222 words

Greens

Mr. Mike Morrice

Apr/11/24 1:13:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there were procedural games on all sides when it came to December and the discussion on amendments to the bill. On the member's point about trust, that is a really important one. On that point, we can agree that we need to be doing more to be more honest with workers about what is actually in the bill. The member mentioned the words “just transition”. This is a term that has been deeply turned into a partisan context. However, the reality is that the term just transition speaks of justice for workers. We need to centre the interests and rights of workers in the transition to a clean economy. I am disappointed that the term has become as politicized as it has. I am disappointed that it is not in this legislation, because it is workers who fought for it to be in the Paris agreement.

151 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

Apr/11/24 1:14:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my Green Party colleague for his excellent speech. This has happened in politics before. Consider the Parti Québécois. Only three Parti Québécois members were elected in the last election. Now, less than a year later, it is leading in the polls. There is going to be an election within a year and a half, so there is still time for Canadians to develop their environmental common sense. The Green Party could be leading in the polls before the next election. I would like to know how the Green Party, if it were in power, would draft a genuine just transition bill. What measures would it include in its draft that could make things better? How would it guard against democracy being thwarted by artificial intelligence or a gag order?

141 words

Mr. Mike Morrice

Apr/11/24 1:15:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, what a nice question from my Bloc Québécois friend. If the Greens were in power, they would make the investments and, as I mentioned in my speech about what experts and workers across the country are calling for, they would support a just transition.

50 words

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/11/24 1:15:34 p.m.
Watch

Before we resume debate, I want to remind hon. members to keep their questions and comments short so that everyone gets a chance to participate in the debate.

28 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

Apr/11/24 1:15:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to contribute to the debate on Bill C-50, an act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economy. I want to talk about something that is critically important, and that is the transition to a low-carbon economy. We live in an era where climate change is an existential threat to our planet and to future generations. I would also like to talk about the fact that, during the study at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, the Liberals opted to impose a gag order rather than vote on the Bloc Québécois amendments. The government chose to ignore Quebec, even though the Bloc Québécois was proposing a simple solution that would allow everyone to move forward toward a real just transition. In Quebec, the transition toward a low-carbon economy has been a major concern for several years because of the importance of our natural resources and our energy industry, as well as our awareness of the need to protect the environment. Quebec can accomplish this green transition because it made choices that ensure a wealth of renewable energies and natural resources. In Quebec, as in Canada, this green transition must take into account the rights and needs of indigenous peoples to ensure a fair and inclusive transition. To successfully carry out this huge transformation, the federal government needs to fully support Quebec’s green expertise and innovation in such areas as the electrification of transportation, the production of carbon-free aluminum, forestry processing and environmentally responsible mining. We are talking about a just transition. That is evident in how we operate mines in Abitibi-Témiscamingue, because things have changed. Mining companies are evolving. Our regional businesses are innovating. They are going above and beyond. Abitibi-Témiscamingue’s expertise is being exported around the world. We even have a joke back home that may well be true. It is said that there is probably someone from Abitibi-Témiscamingue in every mine in the world, given how much the people from the region have contributed, through their expertise, to building those mines throughout history. Our post-secondary educational institutions, like the Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue and the Abitibi-Témiscamingue CEGEP, continue to conduct research in every area, including social licence, greener mining and better ore processing procedures. These are examples of jobs in a just transition. Abitibi-Témiscamingue is ready, and so is Quebec. We have all the assets we need to become the green transition’s North American hub. This is a fact that the federal government should recognize and actively support. The amendments proposed by the Bloc Québécois at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources sought to ensure that the bill would create high-quality job opportunities in low-carbon, high-value-added industries by 2050—while respecting the Canada-Quebec agreements on workforce development and Quebec’s legislative authority, of course. However, with their gag order, the Liberals said no to the Bloc Québécois and to Quebec. What did they say no to, exactly? The Liberals refuse to recognize the Quebec government’s leading role in workforce development and the key role of the network of labour market partners within the Commission des partenaires du marché du travail. The Liberals refuse to have the minister use an adapted approach that takes into account the expertise and responsibilities of Quebec’s Commission des partenaires du marché du travail. The Liberals refuse to have the bill apply in a manner consistent with the Canada-Quebec workforce development agreements. By imposing a gag order, the government has also rejected all the Bloc Québécois’s amendments that were based on suggestions by unions and environmental groups aimed at improving this bill. The Liberals refused to adopt a clear definition of net-zero economy that would be in line with Canada’s international commitments and would make the Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act consistent with the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. The Liberals refused to adopt a clear definition of sustainable or green jobs, running the risk that the government’s strategy will move Canada farther away from its climate objectives. The Liberals refused to recognize that transitioning to a net-zero economy does not rely solely on job creation by the federal government, but on the actions of all governments and on the mobilization of workers, communities, industries and civil society. They refuse to co-operate with all the partners to plan for sustainable jobs and for the transition to a zero-emissions economy. The Liberals refuse to adopt appropriate principles to effectively guide green job creation and the transition to a net-zero economy or to take into account objectives involving economic, social and climate factors. In creating their sustainable jobs council, the Liberals are refusing to take account of such factors as scientific knowledge, expertise and experience in the climate field. The Liberals refuse to add substance to their sustainable jobs plan and ensure it articulates a vision and objectives for implementing the energy transition and helping achieve net-zero. They refuse to equip the secretariat they are creating with the necessary means to oversee the implementation of the energy transition and coordinate sustainable job creation efforts. Lastly, the Liberals have rejected a number of measures aimed at ensuring transparency and accountability within their future sustainable jobs council. We could say that Bill C-50 was problematic from the time it was first drafted, because it does not respect Quebec’s jurisdiction or the expertise of the Commision des partenaires du marché du travail du Québec. Moreover, like it or not, the international climate agreements set ambitious targets for achieving net-zero emissions to encourage governments and businesses to reduce their dependence on fossil fuels. The gradual shift away from conventional carbon-based energy sources is increasing demand for alternatives, such as solar, wind and geothermal energy and energy storage technologies. A just transition involves respecting indigenous peoples' right to manage their resources and territories. Free and informed consent is crucial for guaranteeing their informed participation in decision-making. Indigenous people are bearing the brunt of climate change, and their knowledge needs to be incorporated into climate change policies and legislation. It is too bad that, despite increased awareness of indigenous realities, we are still managing to ignore calls for action on the environment. It is extremely important to recognize that the Earth does not belong to us. I want to remind every member of the House that we have a duty to protect the planet, preserve its biodiversity and reduce our environmental footprint. This also involves respecting the rights of the people who live in Quebec, including indigenous peoples, who have deep ancestral ties to their land. By adopting an attitude of respect and responsibility toward the Earth, we can contribute to building a sustainable future for all. Last summer's forest fires raised serious concerns in my riding, so I am obviously worried about the people in the villages in my region and for the indigenous communities that were evacuated. I had hoped that the sheer extent of the forest fires and the forecast of another dry summer this year would get the members of the House to wake up. Unfortunately, that is not the case. I met with people who experienced tragedy last summer. I had hoped that my colleagues would support the Bloc Québécois, whose amendments were intended to recognize elements that would make it possible to take action while taking into account Quebec's specific characteristics and, more importantly, the need for greater coordination. Paradoxically, Canada is moving in one direction while sabotaging its own efforts in another. On the one hand, it is flaunting its commitment to becoming a net-zero country, reducing its greenhouse gas emissions and fighting climate change. On the other, it is putting more money than ever into oil sands extraction, an activity known for having a large carbon footprint and disastrous environmental effects. This two-faced approach raises questions as to whether Canada's climate change policies are consistent with its actions and highlights the challenges facing this country in its transition to a greener, more environmentally responsible economy. According to the Canada Energy Regulator, Canadian crude oil production has grown considerably over the last 30 years, from 1.7 million barrels per day in 1990 to 4.7 million barrels per day in 2019. In the span of 30 years, we have upped daily production by three million barrels. It is clear that Canada has failed to walk the talk. That is why Canada has one of the worst records in the world in combatting greenhouse gas emissions. All of us here can support legislation announcing measures to mitigate the harmful effects of this increased oil production and to create a sustainable future for all. If we want to talk about a just transition, we must also talk about a paradigm shift in the transport sector. This involves the various regions but was not taken into account when this bill was drafted.

1577 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Apr/11/24 1:26:02 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated my hon. colleague's speech. He did a great job describing the issues associated with climate change and the fight against climate change, as well as ways to approach decarbonization. Frankly, I wish today's debate were more focused on all these aspects. I would like to ask a question because I too believe that the provinces' jurisdiction should be respected. At the very beginning, when the federal government proposed a price on pollution, it offered the other provinces the option to adopt a system similar to the one used by Quebec and British Columbia. Would my colleague care to comment on this? Why did the other provinces not opt in to the carbon exchange?

120 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire

Apr/11/24 1:27:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, first of all, debates must be held at the appropriate time. Today's debate is not about the carbon tax. We are currently studying the bill at report stage. At a time when there could have been real debate on the amendments, the government imposed a gag order in committee. That is why the debates could not take place. That is why we find ourselves taking up yet more of the House's time. We are caught up in procedure again this morning with another pointless vote to get back to the orders of the day. Why is this happening? It is to prevent these bills from being passed. The fault therefore lies as much with the official opposition as with the government, which lacks the will to pass a just transition bill that is coherent and feasible to implement while respecting everyone, including indigenous communities and the provinces.

151 words

Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)

Apr/11/24 1:27:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this bill is really a plan for having a plan. When the Liberals chose their friends to be on the council to decide on the plan, the eyes of Parliament were not on the plan. I do not think that is in keeping with our democracy. What does the member think?

53 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire

Apr/11/24 1:28:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, when someone uses artificial intelligence to generate more than 20,000 amendments, as the Conservatives did in committee, I also worry about the impact this may have on democracy. They got robots to think for them so they could filibuster in committee. That bothers me a little.

53 words

Mr. John Nater

Apr/11/24 1:28:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Just to clarify the record, artificial intelligence was mentioned. I want to clarify that it was Adam Church intelligence for those amendments.

31 words

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/11/24 1:28:58 p.m.
Watch

It is a good clarification. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

9 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Apr/11/24 1:29:02 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, for further clarification, that is confirmation that the Conservatives did use AI on those 20,000-plus amendments, I see.

22 words

Clarification

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/11/24 1:29:12 p.m.
Watch

The debate is between AI and AC. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith.

17 words

Ms. Lisa Marie Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith, NDP)

Apr/11/24 1:29:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as members who are elected to represent our constituents, we know this needs to be at the core of all of our decisions and discussions, to ensure that we have sound climate action that matches the emergency we are facing with a real jobs plan. My colleague prior mentioned the Youth Climate Corps and the importance of this being implemented. It is a motion that has been put forward by my NDP colleague, the member for Victoria, to ensure that young people are part of the solutions, that they are trained, employed and part of the work in lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Could the member share whether he is in support of this motion as well as share his thoughts on how this important work aligns with what we are talking about today?

135 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire

Apr/11/24 1:30:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, obviously, I will always be in favour of proposals that seek to improve conditions for young people, particularly proposals that take into account education, the possibility of getting better jobs that will bring them into harmony with the planet. Above all, I support the idea that young people should be able to enrol in regional educational institutions close to where they live and where we are witnessing the development of our energy sources and the extraction of minerals such as strategic critical minerals. Yes, I do think we have to support this. There are some excellent initiatives under way, particularly at the Abitibi-Témiscamingue CEGEP and the Université du Québec, to reflect on issues such as social licence, the need to better harmonize these projects with our communities, greener mining, innovation and improved mineral processing. I would like to quickly say that I saw a small box at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières that shows the consequences of soil degradation on a site over 50 years. This is made possible by research and employment. It is done through knowledge. We need to encourage this, and the federal government has a responsibility in this respect.

209 words

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

Apr/11/24 1:31:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, today is an important day and a proud day. It is a day that we fulfill the promise to workers who came to us and said that they needed to have their voices heard in dealing with the biggest economic and environmental crisis of the last 300 years. I think back seven years ago, in Edmonton, when I met with the incredible workers at Local 424 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. They had asked me to go to their plant and meet with them. They wanted to show me the incredible training they were doing for a clean-tech future. They said that the world was changing and they were not going to be left behind, that they had the skills to take on whatever. They also said, which I knew then and believe, that there was no place in the world that could move to a clean-energy economy quicker than Alberta, and these workers were at the front of the line in the training. They asked me where the government was on this. They saw the future coming. That question has stayed with me ever since. In the seven years since, the climate crisis has become much more pronounced. We no longer talk about the summer, we talk about the fire season. Our national fire chiefs have talked about a ferocious fire season after last year, when 200,000 Canadians were forced from their homes because of the ongoing climate disaster due to increased burning of fossil fuels. However, we also see how fast the transition is happening around the world. It is not a myth. It is not a lie. It is not, as the Conservatives claim, some kind of globalist woke conspiracy. It is a fact. When the market changes and we do not have a plan, it is heartbreaking. I live in mining country. I remember when the market changed in iron ore prices. Kirkland Lake and my community of Cobalt were never the same again. I remember being on one of the last shifts underground at Stanleigh Mine in Elliot Lake when the uranium market fell. It did not matter how much one believed in disinformation or claimed there was a conspiracy, once it was gone, those jobs were gone forever. We have lost 45,000 jobs in the oil sector, and those jobs are not coming back. We lost 1,500 jobs just this year. Richie Rich Kruger from Suncor told investors in his company, which was part of the group that made $78 billion in profits, that he was going to target work as a way to be more efficient. The billions of dollars they are making they are putting into automation. They are not putting it into communities or jobs. We are seeing a reality where there will be a drop in oil and gas jobs, we figure from 171,000 down to 100,000 by 2030. Therefore, we have to be prepared. When we lost our mining economies in the north, there was no plan. There was no place where people could go, and it was devastating. We talk about a just transition. I always say it is a transition where I come from when we see U-Hauls on the lawns of our neighbours, who are leaving with no future. The IBEW, the operating engineers, Unifor, the Canadian Labour Congress came to us and said that there had to be a plan in place, otherwise we would miss the boat. The transition is happening. China put $890 billion into clean tech last year, more than the rest of the world combined. The result was that it pumped $1.6 trillion into its economy and brought it up 30% in a single year. It is moving ahead. South of the border, Joe Biden's IRA has created 170,000 jobs and over half a trillion dollars in new investments. What we hear from the Conservatives now is that this is some kind of George Soros woke conspiracy that is being planned, a planned Soviet economy to destroy jobs. It was the workers themselves who came to us and said that we needed plan in place, that they did not want all those jobs going stateside. Where are we in Canada? Danielle Smith blew $30 billion in clean-tech investments out of Alberta and said that they were not welcome. Why? It was just out of ideology. This is a province that was Canada's energy superpower and she cannot even keep the lights on in April. It is becoming Canada's banana republic for energy at a time when the climate crisis in Alberta is burning the fields. We are in fire season already and it does not have the water. We have never heard a single Alberta Conservative ever talk about the drought that is hitting due to the climate crisis. We need to take action. It is a reasonable step that we are talking about. We need to ensure this transition happens, and, for my Liberal colleagues, that plan is not moving fast enough. We have to keep up and we have to be competitive, but we need to have workers at the table. They have a right to be at the table, because decisions will be made. It could be pork barrel, misspending or it could be a plan that ensures we build on the strengths of the workers we have and our incredible resources. It is amazing. The other day the leader of the Conservative Party was asked about his opinion on the industrial carbon tax, and of course after having belittled the member for Victoria, which is very much in keeping with his style, he claimed there was no industrial carbon tax. It is a falsehood. We have this funny tradition in Parliament. One can come into the House and lie all day long, but one can never be accused of being a liar because one is supposed to be an honourable member. The fact that the leader of the Conservative Party is making disinformation about the industrial price of carbon is a concern. Maybe he just does not know his file, but I do not think that is the case. The Conservatives this morning, with some of the numbers they were talking about, were trying to claim that Bill C-50 is some kind of plot. They were saying that there were 1.4 million jobs, 170,000 jobs and 200-some thousand jobs that would immediately disappear if this happened. One can only make ridiculous claims like that if one deliberately shuts down the voices of the people who came to testify. What happens when legislation is brought forward, and it can be good or bad and can be amended, is that we hear from the witnesses. Who were the witnesses who were not allowed to speak? The Conservatives did not allow the IBEW to speak. They did not let the carpenters union speak. They shut them down. It was the New Democrats who brought the people who have gone through the coal transition, and the Conservatives did not give a darn about those workers in the coal transition. They did not want to hear them. They did not want to hear anyone from Unifor. Those are the people who are working in the EV technologies. They shut them down and would not let them speak. They did not want the Alberta Federation of Labour to speak. They did not want that, because if they let people speak who actually speak the truth, then disinformation falls by the side of the road. They cannot then walk around with claims of conspiracy and idiocy if there are people who say something is simply not true. When one says to Conservatives something is simply not true, they really lose their minds. Look at the Conservative leader and his support from Alex Jones. Alex Jones is an absolute hate-monger. This is a man who taunted the families of 20 children who were murdered by an evil conspiracy hater. Alex Jones was on the John Birch Society podcast, which is another hate site, bragging about the member who lives in Stornoway. Does anyone think he was going to challenge that? Not a chance. However, I challenged Alex Jones, and within an hour, photos of my daughters were online with their addresses. We know how the hate machine works. It is the politics of intimidation. When I take on the member for Carleton for not even bothering to show up for the election he is threatening to call, boy oh boy, within an hour their hate memes are going through my riding to call me and threaten me. What Conservatives wanted to do was shut down Bill C-50. When they brought forward the amendments, most of which had to be generated by AI because I do not think the Conservatives were smart enough to actually bring them forward, we had to sit through hours with them screaming. They screamed for eight hours of intimidation. It was like gong-show Brownshirts. In all my career, I have never seen such deplorable and disgraceful behaviour.

1531 words

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/11/24 1:40:19 p.m.
Watch

We have a point of order from the hon. member for Lakeland.

12 words

Lakeland