- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- NDP
- Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $114,314.06
- Government Page
- May/29/24 2:53:10 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, last summer was brutal, what with all the wildfires, evacuations, heat waves and the smoke filling the air. In 20 years' time, however, we may look back on the summer of 2023 as the best of any that followed.
The coming summer will be even hotter. There will be more days of sweltering temperatures, more heat waves and more heat domes. The climate crisis is real, and the suffering of children and seniors is real. Can the Prime Minister get it into his head that continuing to support the oil industry is sheer madness?
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/19/23 2:38:05 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, wildfires are ravaging our regions. People are fleeing their homes. Children are breathing in smoke when they go to school in the morning. What has this government done? Nothing.
This Prime Minister promised billions of dollars to fight climate change, but we have learned that that money is still sitting in the government coffers while our forests are burning.
What will it take for the government to release those funds so that we have a chance, just a slim chance, of fighting climate change?
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 2:29:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the images of New York's Statue of Liberty completely shrouded in smoke from Quebec's wildfires. It is astonishing to think that 128 million people in the United States are under air quality advisories. The air quality index for New York City peaked at 413 on a scale of 0 to 500 by the end of the day on Wednesday. Figures like these have not been recorded in 20 years.
Climate change knows no boundaries. What will it take for this government to quit spouting hot air and finally take action?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 12:01:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think it is very important to rise in the House to speak on this extremely important issue. I have the pleasure of following the leader of the NDP, who gave a truly inspiring and highly informative speech. I think that it should be shared with all parliamentarians and all Canadians and Quebeckers as well.
We are currently seeing, experiencing and feeling the impact of the climate crisis and climate disruption. For days, the country has literally been on fire. We can smell it. This week, the air in Ottawa smelled like smoke, like a campfire. The impact of the wildfires burning in the Prairies, Alberta, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec has major repercussions on our communities and our societies.
In Quebec, nothing like this has ever been seen before. Yesterday, there were 140 out-of-control fires. People on the north shore and in Abitibi had to be evacuated. Entire cities, including Chibougamau, are at risk. Tens of thousands of Quebeckers are being forced to leave their homes and seek shelter elsewhere because the planet is literally burning. It is no longer happening in Australia, Siberia or somewhere else in the world. It is happening here, in our own backyard.
People are seeing the real effects of climate disruption. They are seeing the effects of greenhouse gas emissions being so high that some areas get too hot, while others get colder, and that some areas get a lot of rain, causing flooding, while others do not get enough, causing drought. This climate disruption has an impact on our ecosystems and living environments and on people everywhere.
With the smog in Montreal and the smoke in Ottawa, people in frail health, seniors and people with respiratory conditions like asthma are suffering right now, and they will keep suffering in the years to come because it is not over.
Unfortunately, it is not over because previous governments, both Conservative and Liberal, did not do what needed to be done to significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and pollution. That is why, today, Canada is lagging way behind the international community, at the back of the pack in terms of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. We are not an example of what the rest of the world should do. Instead, we are an example of what not to do.
Obviously, we cannot say that a particular forest fire is directly attributable to climate change or climate disruption. For years, however, the IPCC, the UN and all the scientists have been telling us that disasters such as forest fires, floods and droughts will become more frequent. There will be more and more of them, and each event will be more serious. We can therefore conclude that forest fires growing in number and intensity are a direct result of climate change. All the scientific reports and all the IPCC reports have been telling us for years that this is what is coming, that it will happen and that we have to prepare for it or change how we do things.
Unfortunately, we did not change how we do things. We still act according to the old economic model of natural resource extraction and pollution. Canada has been doing this for years and has not changed.
Canada ranks 39th in the world in terms of population. Of course, there are China, India and the United States. However, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, we find ourselves in the top 10. We are the 10th-largest greenhouse gas emitter in the world, when we are 39th in terms of population. I realize that it is cold and that we have to keep warm. Everyone agrees on that. However, we are not the only northern country. Scandinavian countries are also in the north and need to keep warm, but they are not in the same ranking.
There is the Paris agreement; we can hope, but I do not think we will get there. In order to limit global warming to 1.5°, every human being on the planet would need to emit an average of two tonnes of GHGs per year.
Right how, the average Canadian emits 17.5 tonnes of greenhouse gases, when the goal is to reach two tonnes. So when people tell us that Canada is not an important player, that things are not so bad, that we should wait for China and the United States to act, I say no. We have a collective responsibility as Quebeckers and as Canadians because we are major emitters of greenhouse gases. This is due in part to our lifestyles. We buy very heavy cars that consume a lot, even for electric cars. Indeed, due to the materials needed to manufacture an electric car that weighs 2,000 kilograms, we still emit a lot of greenhouse gases.
In addition, Canada is an oil and gas producing country and the Liberal government uses public funds to encourage, subsidize and pay for increased oil and gas production. That is entirely inconsistent with the Paris agreement, which Canada signed and agreed to. At some point, there must be consistency in our actions.
The official opposition tells us that climate change happens, that the climate changes all the time regardless, and that production must be increased. The Conservatives tell us that it is enough to reduce the carbon intensity per barrel of oil. The Conservatives' plan for years has been to reduce the intensity per barrel of oil.
It is like telling a smoker that the amount of tar in each cigarette will be cut in half so they will have less impact on their lungs. That is great news, but if they smoke two packs a day instead of one, that will have no impact. There will be just as much tar in their lungs before and after. Still, that is the Conservatives' plan. They advocate the use of technology so that each barrel of oil is a little bit cleaner, but two or three times more will be produced. The result is the same; absolutely nothing changes.
For their part, the Liberals say that we really need to reduce pollution. They believe that putting a price on carbon will solve the problem. It is all well and good to put a price on pollution and a price on carbon. However, if, at the same time, we buy the Trans Mountain pipeline, which is a bottomless financial pit, with tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money, pretty words and a carbon tax will not change much. If the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, who was previously an environmentalist and an activist, signs a ministerial order to approve the Bay du Nord project, to approve a new operation that will produce billions of barrels of oil near Newfoundland, the carbon tax will not change a thing. At the same time, we are doing something completely contradictory that does the opposite of what we are trying to achieve.
In an article published in La Presse, Patrick Lagacé tells us about the Bay du Nord project, which the Minister of the Environment has authorized. If we took 100,000 motorists and put them on bicycles tomorrow morning, that would not be enough to offset the environmental impact of the Bay du Nord project. The project was postponed for three years, which was not the Liberals' decision. However, the Liberals authorized the project, which will still begin later.
In addition, the government is subsidizing oil and gas companies time and again, which fully contradicts our international commitments and the urgency of the situation. I repeat, the urgency of the situation is staring us right in the face. It is before our eyes, in our mouths, in our noses and in our lungs. Today, people must take their suitcases and leave their villages to flee forest fires, while the Liberal government is not doing enough to fight climate change and is being completely inconsistent.
I had the opportunity to represent the NDP at two COPs, the international climate change summits. During the last COP in Egypt, the Liberal government invited oil companies to join Canada's pavilion to talk about climate change. That is where the Liberals are today. They must take responsibility for their decisions.
1378 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 11:44:32 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to announce that I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Skeena—Bulkley Valley who, I am sure, will teach us a lot about this very important issue.
The planet is burning. It is not a metaphor. Global warming and climate change are real. This is affecting people. It is killing people. It is making people sick and forcing people to leave their villages and towns. The planet is burning and not thousands of kilometres away, but here at home in our own backyard.
Forest fires are currently burning in British Columbia, Alberta, Nova Scotia and Quebec. What bright idea did the Conservatives come up with? They are saying that we should not put a price on pollution. They are completely disconnected from reality, from what is actually happening here at home and around the world.
The ice shelves in Antarctica are collapsing. This is causing ocean levels to rise. If the permafrost ends up melting, it will release an unbelievable amount of methane, a greenhouse gas that is 70 times stronger than CO2. All these phenomena are piling up. The oceans are acidifying and that will also have an impact on climate change.
How is it that the Conservatives are coming back for the eighth time in three years, telling us that we should not put a price on pollution, that it would be good to continue the status quo because everything is going so well and this is good for the economy?
However, if there is no planet, if there is no environment, there will be no economy. I do not understand why the Conservatives keep hammering away on this issue, supporting an industry that is harmful not only to biodiversity and nature, but also to human beings, public health and our economy. Even insurance companies are sounding the alarm. Insurance companies are not the biggest tree huggers in the world, but they are beginning to realize that there are areas and places that are no longer insurable. They no longer want to insure people's homes because it is too risky. It is too risky, whether for floods, forest fires or landslides. It has come to that point.
The Conservatives keep repeating the same old line that nothing needs to be done or we should wait until others do something. If China does nothing, we do nothing. If the United States does nothing, we do nothing.
As human beings and citizens of the world, we have a responsibility to take action to ensure that our environment remains healthy, viable and livable for our children and our grandchildren. As Quebeckers and Canadians, we have a special responsibility because we are big polluters. It is true, we have a small population but we are major greenhouse gas emitters.
In 2021, Canada ranked as the 10th GHG-emitting country in the world. By population, it is ranked 39th in the world. Thus, we should be ranked 39th for greenhouse gas emissions, but no, we are ranked 10th. We are in the top 10 emitters because, on average, our per capita greenhouse gas emissions total 17.5 tonnes per year.
According to the Paris agreement, to perhaps hold the temperature increase to 1.5° or 2°, per capita greenhouse gas emissions must be limited to two tonnes per year, on average. We are at 17.5 tonnes. This shows the gap between how we live and what result we should attain. It is a huge gap.
I would like to take this opportunity to urge caution when discussing the concept of averages in connection with climate change. When we tell people about the need to be careful because a global temperature increase of more than two degrees could be catastrophic, they usually react by thinking that two degrees is not that much, and they wonder what difference it could make. They tell themselves, after all, they often wake up in the morning to a temperature of 15°C, only for it to rise by the afternoon to 25°C. That is a difference of 10°C in a single day. In Quebec, temperatures can drop to 35 below in winter and rise to 35 above in summer, a difference of 70 degrees. All this leaves people wondering what a 1.5°C or 2°C rise in temperature really means.
They say it is going to alter the planet's ecosystems and, to understand that, we need to go back a bit. When I say “a bit”, I mean a very long time ago. If we go back 20,000 years, it was, on average, 4°C colder than it is today. As a result, Europe was covered by 3,000 kilometres of ice. The planet was uninhabitable, because it was colder. It is easy to see that if, when it was 4° colder, there were 3,000 kilometres of ice, then when it is 4° warmer, a whole slew of areas on the planet would simply become uninhabitable. Human beings, the human body, cannot survive in those conditions. French engineer Jean-Marc Jancovici is quite clear about that.
There are beautiful maps that unfortunately show that an additional 2°C would make certain parts of the world uninhabitable, places such as Central America, northern South America, parts of the Maghreb, South-East Asia, parts of India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, where, if it were over 35° with 100% humidity it would be impossible for human beings to survive. Perspiration would no longer be enough to cool a person's body, so they would die. What happens when people are at risk of dying if they stay in their region, town or village? They move to places where it is not as hot, where it is cooler.
Global warming will lead to phenomenal levels of population migration across the globe, which could give rise to geopolitical conflict, extreme tension and probably even war. That is why former U.S. vice-president Al Gore won a Nobel Peace Prize several years ago for his work on the environment and the prevention of climate change. Why would someone win the Nobel Peace Prize when we are talking about the environment? I just explained why, and it might be worth reflecting on.
I submitted a written question to the government recently, specifically to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and the department responsible for housing, to find out how the federal government plans to handle the arrival of climate refugees. The answer was that Canada has the national housing strategy, that everything is going to be fine and no one needs to worry about it.
We have a Liberal government that is a climate change laggard on the international stage. It is incapable of planning for what is coming. Greenhouse gas emissions in Canada increased by 2% in 2021. Between 1990 and 2021, greenhouse gas emissions in Canada increased by 14% when the goal was to reduce them by 40%. We are way off target. What is more, there has been a dizzying increase in oil and gas production since 2005. The production of oil in the oil sands, which is the most polluting oil in the world, has increased by 215% since 2005 while, internationally, Canada boasts. It attends COP and says that it is a model, that we need to transition, that it is important and we need to pay attention. In the meantime, there is a 215% increase in production in the oil sands. That means that, since 2005, 200,000 wells have been drilled to find oil and gas.
The Liberals tell us that things will work out, that we will be able to reach our objectives, yet their actions say the opposite. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change is a former founder of Equiterre, an organization that is currently suing him for shirking his responsibilities. Although he claims he wants to be there to change the world and save the planet, he picked up his pen or pencil and signed a ministerial order green lighting the Baie du Nord project, a decision solely within his purview that will ultimately generate hundreds of millions of barrels of oil.
On the one side we have the Conservatives, dinosaurs who refuse to take the matter seriously, and on the other side we have the Liberals, saying one thing and doing the opposite.
1419 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
