SoVote

Oct/3/22 4:00:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, with respect, I disagree with the government's decision on the gas turbines. To be frank, both the Republic of Germany and Canada were duped by the Russians in being convinced to waive the sanctions to send the gas turbines back to Gazprom. The fact is that since the decision has been taken, Russia has proven the point. NATO has concluded that Russia was behind the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline through the Baltic Sea into Germany. Russia clearly has no interest in resurrecting this pipeline if it was willing to essentially blow up parts of it, which are leaking dangerous amounts of methane and gas into the atmosphere and the Baltic Sea. It was the wrong decision taken by both the German and Canadian governments. I think in hindsight, as it was at the time, that is clear, since Russia itself, as NATO has concluded, has sabotaged the very pipeline that these turbines were purportedly going to keep open.

163 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 106 - Oct/3/22

Mr. Yves Perron

Oct/3/22 4:45:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for his question. Indeed, Russian citizens are currently trying to flee. It is my understanding that they are even being turned back at some borders. I find that unfortunate because people are never really guilty of their leaders' crimes. With respect to social media, the propaganda may indeed play a significant role. Unfortunately, Russians do not have access to real and objective information from outside the country. Many media are censored. That is the danger. I have heard horror stories from people in the same family who did not believe one another because they did not have the same version of the story. It is important to use these media. I do not know if it is possible, but we must do something to give the Russian people access to information. Meanwhile we must keep up the tough stance against this awful regime.

150 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 106 - Oct/3/22

Mrs. Julie Vignola (Beauport—Limoilou, BQ)

Oct/3/22 5:26:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think we all agree on the content of the report and its main recommendation. That said, I would like us to take this thought process even further. Once we say that we reject these new borders, what is the next step? The Russians will not back down. They are not going to say, “Oh, you're right. Sorry”, and go home. What is the next step? Does my colleague have any suggestions?

77 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 106 - Oct/3/22

Mr. Arnold Viersen (Peace River—Westlock, CPC)

Oct/3/22 6:33:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to join in this debate today to condemn the referendums that have been held in the occupied territories of Ukraine. One of the things I want to get on the record is about natural gas or, as we call it, the “freedom energy” that Canada can provide to the world. We have seen over the years how the Liberal government has stood in the way of the production of Canadian natural resources and the export of natural gas around the world, the export of our freedom energy, as it were. Now we see the impacts of that when it comes to Europe, with its dependence on Russian gas and its somewhat hampered ability to provide aid to Ukraine because the Russians hold them ransom with natural gas. Also, there is the fact that the sale of natural gas funds the war. The sale of natural gas funds the Russian war machine. As Russian energy is sold around the world, that money comes back to Russia and that is what is allowing the Russians to maintain their war against Ukraine. That is what I wanted to get on the record here today: the fact that Russia is the aggressor in this instance and that Russia needs revenues in order to be able to maintain this war. I come from a part of the country that is well endowed with natural gas. I remember that before I was elected, in 2013 or 2014, Canada was talking about LNG. There was big support for LNG on both ends of the country. We could have been a first mover in that, and we could have led the world in that technology. We would have been able to provide both Europe and Asia with LNG. Unfortunately, due to government inaction, we have been unable to approve these projects and we have been unable to provide the world with the freedom energy that comes from the promised land, as I like to call it, in northern Alberta. Here we are today. We heard from the member for Etobicoke Centre about how Ukrainians feed 400 million people in the world, and that food is not getting to the rest of the world at this time. Canada has the opportunity to step up and provide more food to the world, but at the very time when the world is looking for more food, the Liberal government is talking about reducing the use of fertilizer in this country. Do members know what happens when we reduce the use of fertilizer? We lose food production. The use of fertilizer multiplies our food production by a factor of about three, so if we took away all the fertilizer we use, we would only get a third of the food production in this country. A warning to the world, in terms of the use of fertilizer, is the country of Sri Lanka. It has abolished the use of fertilizer and has basically destroyed its economy and starved its own people, so I would recommend that Canada does not go down that way. We can feed the world, and we can provide it with the freedom energy it needs.

534 words

All Topics