44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 24, 2022 11:00AM
- Oct/24/22 5:54:00 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, the member spoke a bit about the right to a healthy environment.
Can she share more about the implications of that right being only in the preamble of the bill, as well as these words about it being balanced with other factors, including economic ones?
What are the implications of this so-called right being balanced against other factors?
Lastly, would she share more about how this could be improved in future stages of the legislation?
78 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:06:39 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I do agree, but I also think that part of this is understanding there is innovation in this country. When we look at what is happening in our environment, it seems that it is often a discussion of right now change or no change at all. I think there is a progression that needs to happen, but that needs to be really invested in and the rules need to be in place.
I agree. I think we need to do our work. I have heard from some folks from the disability community who have said to me really clearly that there are some uses of plastic that are really important to them, and we need to listen to those voices. However, there is so much innovation that needs to be invested in. Quite frankly, we need rules put in place in this country so that it pushes innovation. Things do not get done if there is not a rule that they have to meet, so let us make sure those rules are in place so that we can get to that innovation.
I believe it is possible, because a long time ago none of us thought we would be flying in a plane but we are. Let us see what innovation can happen in the next while.
219 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:09:48 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech and I appreciate how much environmental issues matter to her.
One thing I want to know is why the agreement between the NDP and the Liberals is based on issues that fall under provincial jurisdiction. Also, since they were so focused on provincial issues, why not include the environment too?
Now that the blank cheque is signed and the agreement is in place, my colleague will have to support the many gag orders that the Liberal Party will impose under the guise of strengthening environmental protection for a healthier Canada.
What are my colleague's thoughts on the Liberals' decision to resume oil exploration by approving Bay du Nord and on the fact that they seem to be doing anything but protecting the environment for a healthier Canada?
137 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:20:11 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I am willing to work across the aisle and willing to work with anyone to improve the environment and address issues that will lead to a healthier Canada. There is language in this bill about removing substances when they are no longer used in Canada, and I certainly hope that toxic substances are no longer being used in Canada. I think that would address the member's concern.
70 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:22:37 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I guess hope is eternal and something is always possible. I know that at the environment committee, in working with members of all parties, we try to find common ground.
I do not want to have debates about whether climate change is real, as we are far beyond that, but I believe we can work together to try to move forward, because everybody feels that a heathier Canada and a healthier environment are good not only for Canadians but for all citizens around the world. I hope we can work together.
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:38:53 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, the intervention that was made previously was interesting. I just heard a comment in one of the questions from somebody who is often heard in the House about how this is not somehow a government bill. I would just like to put on the record that the government's representative in the Senate moved this bill. It went through that process in the Senate with some amendments, some of which are concerning. I am certainly now glad to have the opportunity to enter into some fulsome debate.
Being that I represent what many, and even I, would refer to as oil country, many would suggest somehow that I do not care about the environment. In fact, those accusations have been made in this place. I would like to set the record straight on a number of fronts. I care deeply not only about our environment, but also about our planet's future. I would emphasize that by articulating a couple of things.
One is that I am the fifth generation to farm in Alberta's special areas. For those who listening, and I am sure there are many, who do not understand some of the dynamics around farming, if one does not take seriously the responsibility for conservation, environmental preservation, land management and soil management, one does not succeed in farming, let alone survive six generations. I know that I am proud every moment I have my kids come and ride with me in the combine or the tractor.
Second, the next thing I would like to articulate is something that many in this place, I have heard throughout the course of this debate, would suggest that supporting Canada's oil and gas industry is somehow oppositional to supporting a strong environment. In fact, a comment was made earlier about how supporting a plastics industry in this country is somehow oppositional to supporting a clean environment. I would like to articulate very clearly how that could not be further from the truth.
I am proud to represent an area, as I said, that has a strong legacy of oil and gas production, much of which goes into creating not only the fuel that powers the planes we fly in and the vehicles we drive but also so many of the things in our lives that include petrochemical-based products. The fact is that in Canada, we have good environmental legacy on that.
Something that needs to be pointed out is that, in Canada, we are the best at talking about why we have the emissions frameworks and all of those other things surrounding it, so we can not only talk about being good on the environment, but also know that we are good on the environment. So many places around the world refuse to even account properly for their impact on the planet, whether the impact is of emissions, ground contamination or a whole assortment of some of the challenges that come out as a result. We have much to be proud of in this country.
It frustrates me. I do not exaggerate when I say that I hear daily from many constituents who are frustrated by the left's attitude. That is the Liberals, the New Democrats, the Bloc and the Greens. I hear how frustrated many constituents are at the ignorance that is displayed toward the standards that we have in this country.
As we approach Bill S-5 and some of the concerns I have surrounding a number of the regulations, and further concerns about some of the amendments that were made in the Senate, we need to ensure that we are talking to the stakeholders involved and not have unintended consequences by passing legislation that would change regulatory frameworks, which may not have immediate consequences but could have long-term implications, and not just for Canadian industry. We need to ensure we understand all the aspects of that.
I am so proud of how my constituency has stepped up when it comes to being an environmental leader around the world. To emphasize that, Red Deer Polytechnic, formerly Red Deer College, has a team that included a former constituent of mine from Stettler. As I was walking into the debate here, my constituency assistant sent me an article talking about how this former constituent was a part of a team that had won an award for how they were able to reduce emissions in the production of things like solar panels.
I have numerous examples of how there have been emission reductions in the energy industry and world-class quality products in terms of water management, being able to take even tailings pond water and make it so pure that it could be used for drinking water. There are so many examples, including carbon capture, utilization and storage. The fact is that we can have even carbon-negative oil in this country.
The reality is, and I will end on this, the world simply needs more Canada, whether it is our resources, our ideas or the standards to which we accomplish so much. Whenever we talk about the environment, I am tired of having to apologize for the fact that I come from an area of the country that knows how to do energy and agriculture well, both of which by their very nature are offensive to many.
We do them well. In fact, I would suggest we do it the best in the world. It is time for us to be proud of that, and not only within this place, but to make sure that we take those lessons learned and promote them around the world. If we do so, Canada and the world wins.
951 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:21:59 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for her work on the environment committee.
What piqued my interest is when she talked about working across the aisle and trying to do better things for Canadians and the environment by working with the opposition. I would ask her to consider this. How can we look across the aisle and work with the opposition when on a daily basis we get such a kickback every time we try to come up with an environmental initiative? It gets very frustrating, from my point of view. I would be interested in the member's thoughts on how we might be able to break through.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:33:24 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, the Conservatives keep talking about this as though it is as a government bill. I would remind the member that the burgundy shade on the screen where it lists the name of the bill, along with the S in front of it, means that it came from the Senate. It is not a government bill.
Nonetheless, the way the Conservatives are approaching this is that as we have to use so many plastics nowadays, therefore we may as well give up and assume that plastics are inevitably going to be as abundant as they are now forever.
Yes, I am aware, and I am sure most people are aware of the fact that just about everything in this room has some degree of plastic in it, but does that mean that we cannot at least strive for a better world? If we know that plastics are so bad, that the very first plastic ever created is still in existence today, and the harm they are doing to our environment, why would we not at least try to do better? Why can we not at least look for ways to do things differently, even if it means that today we are still going to be using plastic? Why can we not look toward a future that has less plastic in it? Would the member not agree that is a good thing?
232 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
