SoVote

Mr. Stephen Ellis (Cumberland—Colchester, CPC)

Mar/3/22 10:52:26 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his speech and its comprehensive nature. Does he agree with the European Union that an important energy strategy will also be essential to ensuring the safety and security of nations going forward and at this time? We see that as a very important part of what is going on with Ukraine. Is energy security not an important part of the government's process as well?

73 words

All Topics

Mr. Maninder Sidhu

Mar/3/22 10:52:51 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the Ukrainian government has approached us with many different asks, including support for lethal and non-lethal supplies, support through using sanctions against the Russian regime and supports for Ukrainians who want to come to Canada, and we have delivered. We have been there for Ukrainian people and for the country of Ukraine. I want to reiterate, in terms of working on severe costs to the Russian regime, that this unjustified and unprovoked act needs to be handled seriously. We are working with our NATO allies and our partners around the world.

94 words

All Topics

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

Mar/3/22 10:53:40 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the Liberal environment minister recently said, “The solution to global energy problems is not to increase our dependency on fossil fuels”. He continued that the best way to improve the energy security of European countries is to simply reduce dependence on oil and gas “regardless of where it's coming from”. I am glad to see that the minister recognizes that increasing our dependence on oil and gas is not the way to respond to the climate crisis. However, despite that recognition of the problem, the Liberal government is still giving billions of dollars of subsidies to the oil and gas sector and purchased a pipeline. It is also the only government in the G7 under whose watch pollution has increased. Will the Liberals listen to their own minister and finally stand up to the oil and gas sector and hasten the transition to a clean energy future?

154 words

All Topics

Mr. Maninder Sidhu

Mar/3/22 10:54:31 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as we know, climate change is real and it is happening. When we look toward the future, and we see what is happening in B.C. and with floods and heatwaves across this country, we want to make sure that we are there to protect generations to come, including my own children. We will continue to stand there for the environment, but we will not stand back when Ukrainians are being attacked, and we want to be focused on what we are doing in Ukraine to ensure that world order is restored and democracy is protected.

98 words

All Topics

Ms. Louise Chabot (Thérèse-De Blainville, BQ)

Mar/3/22 10:55:18 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to come back to the Conservative Party motion. Does the Liberal government believe that by building pipelines, thereby “allowing Canadian natural gas to displace Russian natural gas”, as the motion calls for, we will will meet the current needs of a serious war and crisis in Ukraine, where thousands of women and children are forced to flee and leave the men behind? Does my colleague think that is the solution?

77 words

All Topics

Mr. Maninder Sidhu

Mar/3/22 10:56:17 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member opposite has a very important question. I hope to answer the member in French one day, but I am still learning. I think it is really important that we see the motion at hand and the importance of standing with Ukraine. Just this morning, the Minister of National Defence said we are providing additional lethal weapons to Ukraine, including up to 4,500 M72 rocket launchers, up to 7,500 hand grenades and up to $1 million to Ukraine to purchase high-resolution satellite imagery for the Ukraine military to monitor movements of Russian forces in its territory. It is important that we continue to focus on the needs of Ukraine. We continue to stand with Ukraine and its people, and we will continue to do what we can with our allies and partners around the world.

141 words

All Topics

Hon. Robert Oliphant (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lib.)

Mar/3/22 10:57:17 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the other Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, for his great speech and his continuing good work on this and many other files. This debate today gives me the opportunity to state once again Canada's unwavering and united support, how we are standing in solidarity with the people of Ukraine, and to once again, unequivocally, condemn Vladimir Putin's unprovoked and unjustifiable war of aggression against the people of the democratically elected government of Ukraine. I believe we stand united in this House across all party lines in that condemnation, and I am proud to be a Canadian parliamentarian because of that. President Putin's war is in contravention to article 2, paragraph 4, of the UN charter. It has tyrannically shattered the lives of Ukrainian people and imposes the greatest threat to peace, security and human rights on the continent of Europe, certainly in what I have seen in my memory, and even earlier. He is implementing his shocking, distorted vision and view of history that an independent Ukraine does not exist, which is simply not true. This is a grave moment. We all stand united against this tyrant. Yesterday, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights reported at least 227 civilian deaths, while the UN Refugee Agency estimated that one million people have already fled Ukraine. The real figures are probably even higher than that, and they will continue to rise exponentially should the Russian regime, which is being enabled by Belarus, persist with its callous and cruel disregard for human life and human rights. The international community stands in solidarity and has condemned Russia. To look at the vote at the United Nations this week, we realize that Russia is constantly being isolated by all except for a very small number, perhaps four or five countries in the world. Let me be clear, Russia's actions are as deplorable as they are unacceptable to us and to the international community. Indeed, they may amount to war crimes under international humanitarian law, which is why we stand together with other nations in referring this to the International Criminal Court to actually investigate whether war crimes are already being committed. As my colleague stated, we will continue to stand with the Ukrainian people. Our response has been strong, and it has been fast. Sanctions are an important component of Canada's principled and pragmatic approach to foreign policy. The decision to deploy sanctions is not one that Canada takes lightly. In close coordination with our international allies and partners, including the United States, the U.K., the EU and Australia, Canada is holding President Putin and those complicit with his aggressive actions accountable. On February 22, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs announced our first round of sanctions against all members of the Russian State Duma who voted to recognize the independence of the so-called independent republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. We also began our pressure on the Russian financial system with sanctions on two Russian banks and a dealings ban on Russian sovereign debt. On February 24, Canada continued to tighten the noose with additional sanctions on key members of President Putin's inner circle and his close contacts, those who have been benefiting from his regime. On February 25, we moved against President Putin himself, sanctioning both him and his chief of staff. Canada also sanctioned Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, and all other members of the Russian security council, including the ministers of justice, defence and finance. In response to Belarus's clear complicity with Russia's unacceptable actions, we also announced sanctions against some 57 Belarusian elites and entities who are close associates of Alexander Lukashenko, as well as several oligarchs. We are continuing to put the squeeze on the Russian economy, and on February 26, we moved to disconnect Russian banks from the SWIFT global interbank payment system. This will significantly restrict their ability to send money in and out of the country, effectively pausing Russia's major imports and exports. On February 27, in coordination with several European countries, Canada closed its airspace to Russian aircraft operators. On February 28, we announced a dealings ban on the Russian central bank, the Russian National Wealth Fund, and the Russian Ministry of Finance. On February 28, we also announced a ban on crude oil imports from Russia. Measures to implement this ban will be finalized very shortly. On March 1, two days ago, we announced our intention to ban Russian-owned or Russian-registered ships and fighting vessels in Canadian ports and internal waters, and yesterday we announced we would impose restrictions on an additional 10 key individuals from two important companies in Russia's energy sector. Let me be clear: More will come until Russia disengages, de-escalates, retreats, allows Ukraine and the Ukrainian people to be free, and respects their territorial integrity. Every day we have responded to the requests of the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian government. Every day we have done the things that are meant to suffocate the Russian economy and to isolate Russia in the world. It is extremely important that we continue these important efforts and not be distracted by other issues. It is extremely important that we keep our eye on the ball and ensure that we are doing what President Zelensky and the Ukrainian government have requested of us to put that squeeze on and suffocate the Russian government. This is the way that Russians will understand what their government is doing in their name and call upon the Russian government itself to stop as well. What President Zelensky has not asked for are more pipelines in Canada. What President Zelensky has not asked for is a retreat to 20th century energy policies. What President Zelensky has not asked for is to engage in a debate this day about climate change or about oil security. What President Zelensky has asked is for us to be laser-focused on the problems of Ukraine and to allow Ukraine to have our support on every critical aspect on which they need support. I am deeply concerned that the Conservative Party does not get that. While I absolutely appreciate their solidarity on the actions that we have taken, what distresses me greatly is a crass opportunity that they are taking, like an opportunistic infection, to take advantage of a deeply disturbing grave international crisis that affects every one of us in this House, every Canadian and every one—

1097 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek

Mar/3/22 11:05:15 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I am listening with great interest to the speech of the member opposite. To use, on such an important subject, words accusing his political opponents of being “crass” and referring to them as an “infection”—

47 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Mar/3/22 11:05:29 a.m.
Watch

That is a point of debate. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

10 words

Hon. Robert Oliphant

Mar/3/22 11:05:33 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am glad I am able to continue, because the interruption to our important debate on this international crisis is actually in the third section of this motion, which makes it absolutely an inappropriate debate to have. I take the opportunity to say that we stand with the Ukrainian people and we stand with the Government of Ukraine. We stand with the free world and we stand with those who value the international rules-based order. We stand with our colleagues and like-minded companion countries, such as the EU, the U.K., the U.S. We stand with the vast majority of the countries of the world at the U.N. that voted to condemn the actions of Russia and Vladimir Putin. What we do not want to engage in today is a debate about energy security, although it is an important debate. We do not want to engage in talking about our climate change initiative, although it is another important debate, or talking about weaning us away from fossil fuels or about a 21st century energy policy that guarantees Canada will have the energy security we need. These are important debates, but today's debate should be about Ukraine. It should be about an international crisis, and I am frankly embarrassed that we are actually having to deal with this issue while the world is facing such a crisis. I would hope that all members stand in solidarity with Ukraine and continue to do that.

249 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Mar/3/22 11:07:15 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am glad I have the opportunity to ask this question, because I believe that the member is missing much of the context for the critical importance of the third part of this motion. We are coming into another growing season. I come from one of the breadbaskets of the world, and Ukraine is another one of those breadbaskets of the world, providing food security for much of Europe and much of the world. The current government seems to be unaware that energy policy has a direct impact on global food security, whether that be directly through things like nitrogen-based fertilizer, which is a miracle of modern agriculture that allows massive increases in global food production to be able to feed the world, or whether it be in the fuel that is required to run the equipment to put the seed in the ground and harvest the crop. Would the member acknowledge that his calling the conversation around energy security—which relates to food security, which relates to poverty reduction, which relates to all of these very important subjects—“an infection” is misguided? Would he acknowledge that the conversation is needed to ensure that the world has peace and security both in Ukraine, going forward, and—

214 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Mar/3/22 11:08:33 a.m.
Watch

I have to allow for other questions. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

11 words

Secretary

Hon. Robert Oliphant

Mar/3/22 11:08:36 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a wonderful opportunity to talk about the nearsighted nature of the Conservative Party. The hon. member is talking about the upcoming growing season as though this motion is going to have any effect on the ability to provide food for the world from Ukraine. What will provide an effect on ensuring that the Ukrainian breadbasket continues to provide food for Europe is stopping this war. It is stopping this war, and that is what we are focused on by sanctioning the government of Russia, by continuing strong measures, by working with international partners. We are not short-sighted. We are getting the job done.

108 words

All Topics

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Mar/3/22 11:09:24 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, from what I understand, the Conservative motion is suggesting that we can resolve a dependence problem by creating a new dependence. That seems about as logical as having a Liberal lead the Conservatives. To me, the government's position is less clear. To date, the government has invested $20 billion of public funding into a pipeline that even the private sector did not want. Can the parliamentary secretary confirm today that increasing the transfer and production capacity of western oil is not a solution to the geopolitical problems we are seeing today in Ukraine?

97 words

All Topics

Hon. Robert Oliphant

Mar/3/22 11:09:58 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am intentionally not going to answer that question in the fullest sense of the word because I want this debate to be about Ukraine. I do not want to be sidetracked by the third part of the Conservative motion. I would like us to focus on Ukraine and on what we can do in this House to stop that aggression by Russia and have that debate about energy self-sufficiency, which is a valuable debate, at a future time. I welcome working with the Bloc on a future debate in that regard.

95 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Mar/3/22 11:10:39 a.m.
Watch

I see that there is some heckling going on and maybe some people trying to answer that question. I ask them to wait until it is time for questions and comments. The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

39 words

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

Mar/3/22 11:10:46 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am absolutely appalled to see the Conservatives' use of talking about children going hungry as a reason for us to spend billions on a pipeline. We are dealing with a world crisis of people dying in the streets, being killed, and they see this as another reason to turn on the taps of taxpayer money. We have spent $121 billion in subsidies to big oil in the last seven years, $75 billion on carbon capture, $21 billion on TMX and $1 billion on the abandoned wells, and the Conservatives are talking about using a humanitarian crisis for more. Will the Liberals agree with us that this motion is undermining Canada's reputation of standing up for Ukraine because the Conservatives are more interested in satisfying big oil?

130 words

All Topics

Hon. Robert Oliphant

Mar/3/22 11:11:36 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would easily say yes and I thank the member for Timmins—James Bay for his ongoing work on this issue. We need to unite in this House to talk about the important issue of Ukraine, but we must also continue to talk about the important issue of climate change. We will do that at a future time. I look forward to that ongoing conversation.

68 words

All Topics

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ)

Mar/3/22 11:12:06 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to point out that I will be splitting my time with my colleague from Repentigny. Today, we are being asked once again to participate in a very important debate on the situation unfolding in Ukraine. To present the Bloc Québécois's position on the Conservative motion, I would like to read it point by point. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills is proposing “That the House: (a) condemn President Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation for their unprovoked, illegal attack and invasion of Ukraine”. We completely agree with point (a). However, we were expecting that, a little later, they would make suggestions about possible additional sanctions to punish Vladimir Putin and Russia for the unprovoked and illegal invasion of Ukraine. We were also expecting them to propose additional sanctions on the oligarchs. The member then suggests that the House “(b) stand with Ukraine, the people of Ukraine and Canadians in the Ukrainian community”. Again, no one could be against that. We have said many times over that we stand with the people of Ukraine. We are not going to stop standing with them now. We would have liked to see some proposals, though. What more can we do on top of the humanitarian assistance we have already sent to support the people of Ukraine? Will the government increase the $10 million cap it set to match the donations Canadians make to the Red Cross? We are waiting to hear. Will the government lift the visa requirements that are still in place for Ukrainian refugees? These people are fleeing with a small suitcase, can barely find a place to sleep, and yet they are being asked to fill in 14 copies of forms in a language that is probably not their first language. They also have to pay fees to be able to seek refuge in Canada. As the Bloc Québécois leader said, Canada is allowing people to cross the border at Roxham Road without a visa but cannot lift the visa requirement for Ukrainian refugees. We were expecting the Conservative motion to propose ways to meaningfully demonstrate our solidarity with Ukraine, the Ukrainian people and Ukrainian Canadians. We then jumped to point (c) thinking that we would see proposals for sanctions to punish Russia, Vladimir Putin and the oligarchs who support him. We expected to see proposals in point (c) to help Ukrainians, Ukraine and our fellow Canadians of Ukrainian origin, but no. What then did we find in point (c)? It suggests that the House “(c) call on the Government of Canada to undertake measures to ensure new natural gas pipelines can be approved and built to Atlantic tidewater, recognizing energy as vital to Canadian and European defence and security, allowing Canadian natural gas to displace Russian natural gas in Europe, and being consistent with environmental goals in the transition to non-emitting sources of energy”. If that is not a basely self-serving argument, I do not know what is. Honestly, even if we decided to go that route and build pipelines, despite the fact that it would first of all go against the idea that we need to phase out fossil fuels, the conflict would, hopefully, be long over by then. What would be the purpose then, other than to export the dirty oil produced in western Canada? It would have no other purpose, because our German friends cannot rely on Canadian oil and gas to replace Russian oil. That is a bogus argument. What we find in point (c) is a bad idea masquerading as a solution. More than that, it is an idea that would hurt Ukrainians. Why? This morning, our friend Paul Journet, in La Presse, reported that some oil companies in western Canada are owned by Russian oligarchs who are still free from Canadian government sanctions. I would have expected the Conservatives to tell us that they are also going to impose sanctions on the oligarchs who hold shares in western Canadian gas companies. No, they are not proposing sanctions against these oligarchs. However, if we help these oligarchs, we are helping Russia and therefore hurting Ukraine. This contradicts points (a) and (b) in the motion that the House “condemn President Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation for their unprovoked, illegal attack and invasion of Ukraine” and that we “stand with Ukraine, the people of Ukraine and Canadians in the Ukrainian community”. What the Conservatives are proposing means giving more cash to Russian oligarchs who have shares in western Canadian oil companies. Is that how we want to help Ukrainians? Is that the great idea of our Conservative friends to help Ukrainians? All the Conservatives want to do is help their oil industry, period. There is no other explanation. I can name names. How about Roman Abramovitch, who owns 28% of Evraz, which supplies steel for pipelines? That is interesting. How about Igor Makarov, Coastal GasLink's primary shareholder? These are oligarchs who are still dodging sanctions, and we would sure like to know why the Government of Canada has not yet imposed sanctions on them. If only the Conservatives had put forward the idea of punishing these oligarchs too. Let me reiterate: The chief of staff for Alexei Navalny gave the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development a list of oligarchs who should be sanctioned, and that was long before the invasion of Ukraine. We had that list. The Government of Canada had that list. When will it impose sanctions on all those oligarchs? Today, the Conservatives actually want us to send more cash their way and help them help Vladimir Putin invade Ukraine. We wholeheartedly agree with parts (a) and (b) of the motion, but how could we possibly support the part (c) the Conservatives have put forward in this motion? Never in a million years would we support that kind of thing because supporting the Conservatives' proposal would hurt Ukraine. If the Conservatives had been the slightest bit reasonable and honest in their desire to help, given the climate crisis as well, they would have said that this proposal will need to be accompanied by energetic measures, no pun intended, to undertake the green transition and significantly reduce the amount of oil and gas in our economy. Once again, they come up with no such proposal. They are simply proposing that we consume even more oil and gas and export it to other countries so they can continue consuming it, which runs completely counter to the idea that we need to start the transition immediately. Allow me to reiterate: The Bloc Québécois is voting against this motion. We take no pleasure in doing so, but we have no choice. My colleague from Repentigny will most certainly provide even more reasons why, from an environmental perspective, the Bloc Québécois cannot subscribe to a motion like this one.

1171 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Mar/3/22 11:22:04 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is unfortunate that my colleague from the Bloc failed to read the part in part (c) that references the need for a transition to non-emitting sources of energy. I am going to give the benefit of the doubt to members from all other political parties who seem to think this is somehow about a big oil vendetta. The reality is that the energy security situation in Europe has been funding the war in Ukraine. It is now high time for us to acknowledge the fact that we need to ensure there are ethical sources of energy that do not get into the hands of despots. Would the member acknowledge that this is not simply about oil, but about the ingredients that are required for things like fertilizer? With an upcoming growing season in Ukraine, this would be absolutely essential to ensuring that the people of Ukraine have not only energy security, but long-term food security as well.

162 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 40