44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 16, 2022 02:00PM
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, who has just finished his speech, for his support.
This is the moment of truth. This is the moment when we separate the parliamentarians who make vague promises they do not necessarily intend to keep from those who are prepared to put their names down on paper. In real life, if someone makes a commitment, they are prepared to put their name down on paper.
There have been plenty of commitments and vague promises to protect supply management. There has been no shortage of unanimous motions. Our hon. colleague from Montcalm mentioned them earlier. The Quebec National Assembly has also unanimously adopted several motions. This is what everyone wants. It is time to put it on paper, in legislation. That will give us a reading on those vague promises.
This legislation will broaden the Minister of International Trade's mandate to include the obligation to protect supply-managed sectors. It will be written into the mandate letter. A lot of parliamentarians are trying to make us believe that this is not possible and that it will hurt trade.
I listened to the parliamentary secretary just now. To be honest, I found the substance of his speech disappointing. He said that Bloc Québécois members never proved the government had not kept its word, yet it signed twice. Not only did it sign twice, but in the latest trade agreement with the United States, CUSMA, class 7, milk by-products, was cut out even though it was there because of a perfectly legal internal agreement between producers and processors. The government did that because our milk by-product exports bothered the Americans.
Not only did it bend, it actually rolled over and gave up class 7. It gave a foreign country permission to control the amount of product we export to a third country. That is unbelievable. Plus, the member has the gall to tell us that we did not prove the government does not keep its promises.
Okay, rant over. I hope he was listening.
Back to the topic at hand. Understanding why it is important to protect supply management starts with understanding what it is.
There are three components. The quantity produced is controlled, and the price is controlled. So far, so good. However, to be able to control the quantity produced in order to control the price, what enters from outside our borders must also be controlled. It is like a three-legged stool. There must be three points of support to keep it balanced, stable and upright.
Consecutive Conservative and Liberal governments have been merrily cutting off the third leg, bit by bit. They cut off a section of the leg representing what enters from outside in the first agreement, then in the second, and again in the third. The stool is still standing, but it is definitely crooked.
Fortunately, our farmers are good farmers; they are proud and they are brave. They work hard and make the system work. However, if we do not protect it now, there will be new international agreement negotiations in the coming months and years. Think of the agreements with Great Britain, Mercosur or any other trade group. This is a global trend. That it fine; it is normal.
To answer another of the parliamentary secretary's questions, yes, the Bloc Québécois supports international trade. The Bloc Québécois has read the WTO rules. It discovered that, under the WTO rules, every country has the right to protect certain sectors of its economy. That is legitimate. Everyone does it. The Americans complain all the time, but they protect their cotton and sugar, just as the Japanese protect their rice. In Canada and Quebec, we protect our supply-managed sectors. That is all. It is as simple as that because the system works well, as we saw during the pandemic. That was noted by my brilliant colleague from Montcalm, with whom I am pleased to share the responsibility of advancing this fundamental bill.
I would like to talk about what would happen if we got rid of supply management. The parliamentary secretary and the government have two choices right now: either protect supply management, or continue to kill it bit by bit. Many times in the House, I have criticized the government for its lack of courage and its nefarious intent to kill supply management over 10, 15 or 20 years so that it does not end up costing the government anything. The plan is to take away a little bit from farmers, let them struggle along, take away another little bit, let them struggle along and then give them some compensation.
I want to take this opportunity to commend the minister for keeping her word and paying the final compensation this fall. We are pleased and farmers are pleased; the case is closed. Now, let us make sure this never happens again. Let us move on. I invite each and every parliamentarian here to show some respect for the people who feed us, who get up every morning and work hard. It is a magnificent system.
Many of my colleagues talked about Wisconsin, where the farms are huge. The average herd size in Quebec is about 87 cows, whereas in the United States, the average herd size is more than 300 cows. There are also farms that are even bigger than that. Do we want milk full of hormones that comes from mega-farms? The reason there are mega-farms in the United States is because the Americans recklessly liberalized their market.
We were smart enough to come up with a system that works well. I am very proud of my pork producers, which is clear any time people from other parties talk to me about pork and exports. I would never prevent them from exporting. I am talking about people out west who want to feed the world and want to export more grain and other commodities. We can do that while protecting our supply management system, which is critical and gives us a strong foundation of food sovereignty and resiliency.
I hope I do not hear any more of the nonsense I was hearing earlier. My colleagues know that this is the second time we have introduced such a bill, because this government likes to prorogue Parliament whenever there is a minor scandal, or call an election whenever there are too many bills on the table that would be damaging to it. Last time, the Liberals voted for our bill, and I thank them for that. I urge them to do the same this time around.
I was thrilled with the answer that the Prime Minister gave me in the previous Parliament when I asked whether he would support us. I would like to remind the House that, at the time, I reached out to the members of the Conservative Party, who were the only ones who were not on board with protecting our sector. They were divided on the issue, as my NDP colleague mentioned earlier. I reached out to them and I am still doing so. The people in our rural areas, our supply-managed producers, need security and predictability. If we do not pass this bill, we will be sending them the message that they need to sell their quotas while they are still worth something because there will be no guarantees in 15 years. That is the message we will be sending.
Regardless of the promises the government makes, no one here can guarantee that the figure will be the same in six months, one year or five years, and no one can guarantee that the same party will be in power either. Collectively, the time is right. Farmers are asking for this, and they are looking to us. Farmers in Berthier—Maskinongé, Quebec and all of Canada are looking to us hopefully.
I will end my speech with an appeal to all farmers. I urge them to rally together and join forces with us. I know they are already on board. I encourage them to call their member of Parliament, whether they are Liberal, Conservative, or any other political stripe, to explain what life is like for them and what supply management contributes to their communities.
Supply management does more than simply ensure that farmers have a decent income. It also keeps communities alive, ensuring that there are twelve farms in the community, not two. It helps ensure that the village school is not empty. The benefits of supply management are exponential in a community. We need to protect our model, and I ask all members to do the right thing and to do it in a positive way.
1464 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.
30 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 6:57:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, with record inflation fuelled by corporate greed, finding safe, affordable and adequate housing has become out of reach for many Canadians. New Democrats have been calling on the Liberals to invest in affordable housing and to stop the profiteering of corporate landlords, but unsurprisingly, the Liberals are tone deaf to the realities of everyday Canadians.
Successive governments, Conservative and Liberal, have made deep cuts to social and co-op housing and have allowed the cost of housing to increase. Under the Harper government, the cost of buying a home increased by 77%, and under the Liberal government, it has gone up another $300,000. The average rent in Canada now is over $2,000 a month. One in five Canadians puts more than 30% of their total income towards their housing cost. Families are struggling to keep a roof over their heads and put food on the table.
When the Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing strategy in 1993, Canada lost more than 500,000 units of social and co-op housing that would otherwise have been built. Now, nearly three decades later, both the Liberals and the Conservatives allow investors to treat housing like a stock market, driving up rents and home prices.
The NDP knows that to address the housing crisis, we have to stop the financialization of housing and we need to meaningfully develop social housing and co-op housing units. Housing advocates are calling for the development of at least 300,000 units of core need housing. We need social housing; we need supportive housing, and co-op is a proven model that works. In fact, rents in co-op housing are $400 to $500 less per month compared to private market rental units.
The Liberals like to talk about their so-called record investments in affordable housing, but the Auditor General's report released yesterday exposed that the government is failing to address the dire homelessness and housing crisis. The Liberals have spent billions to build homes that Canadians cannot afford. What is worse is they do not even know if chronic homelessness has increased or decreased since 2019. They have no idea who is benefiting from their housing initiatives.
The National Housing Strategy Act, passed in 2019, enshrined a human rights based approach to housing under the law. It commits the government to reducing homelessness and to focusing on improving housing outcomes for vulnerable groups and those with the greatest need, yet three years later, Canada's housing crisis is getting worse. The Liberals have spent billions to develop housing that is not affordable for those in need.
The national housing co-investment fund is a program meant to deliver rental housing units at below 30% of one's total income. It was a program meant for low-income households, many of whom are among the most vulnerable, but instead of delivering that, the Liberals changed the affordability criteria to 80% of median market rent. Consequently, low-income and vulnerable people cannot access this housing because it is not affordable. In fact, the housing developed under this program is failing low-income families in seven provinces and territories. At this rate, the Liberals are on track to miss their own target of reducing chronic homelessness by 50% by 2028.
The Liberals' incompetence is shocking. The fallout is deadly. In B.C. alone, there were 247 deaths among individuals experiencing homelessness in 2021, a 75% increase since 2020. In Vancouver East, a large-scale homeless encampment is now a permanent fixture and individual homeless tents are proliferating on the streets—
598 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:01:55 p.m.
- Watch
I am sorry, but the member's time is up. She will be able to continue during her next intervention.
The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, Export Promotion, Small Business and Economic Development.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:02:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Vancouver East for her consistently advocacy on this very pressing issue.
There is no that doubt housing affordability is one of the most pressing issues in the country right now, especially for the most vulnerable, as she articulated. Everyone needs and everyone deserves a safe and affordable place to call home. There is no space between our position and the position of the member opposite on that front.
What I will take issue with is some of the points she made with respect to social and co-op housing. We know that we made a significant investment of $1.5 billion in the last budget, committing to building more units. We talked about historic investments in co-operative housing. I believe the member opposite is fully aware that the Minister of Finance herself grew up in co-operative housing and is deeply committed to expanding the supply of such housing.
This housing includes our commitments to the rapid housing initiative. We announced the details last week, with an expansion of the RHI. That program has consistently exceeded its targets since we introduced it in the early days of the pandemic. It has quickly yielded more than 10,000 new units for people who need them the most. When we talk about people who need it the most, we are talking about initiatives that are focused on women, racialized persons, marginalized persons, indigenous persons and seniors. Those are important objectives to address the vulnerabilities that have been highlighted by the member opposite.
These new steps to boost housing affordability are critical, and we intend to continue in this vein. The 2022 budget reallocated $500 million of funding to launch a new co-operative housing development program, as I mentioned, which is about expanding co-op housing. That includes $1 billion in loans to support co-op housing projects. That is the largest investment in co-op housing for more than 30 years. There is, again, no disparity between the position of the government and the position of the NDP on this particular issue. This investment alone will yield 6,000 new units.
All this activity is building on our efforts and our successes in the housing sector thus far. It is clear there is a housing crisis. We saw that when we were first elected in 2015. We immediately took steps to prioritize housing. We have since created and repaired 440,000 homes. We have taken historic steps to ensure that everyone in this country has a place to call home. That includes people across the spectrum of housing need.
I could give some examples. There is Canadian Forces veteran Bill Beaton, who went from being homeless to living in Veterans' House, a supportive housing facility constructed with funding from the national housing co-investment fund. There is Lianne Leger, a recent university graduate, who was able to make a home for herself in Whitehorse, thanks to the first time home buyer's incentive. There are also the residents of Co:Here housing community, which is in the member opposite's own riding of Vancouver East. That is a 26-unit affordable housing building created through the Government of Canada's bilateral housing agreement with the province.
I want to thank my colleague and her party for her concern about housing affordability in Canada, and point to these significant actions.
568 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:06:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would invite the member to actually read the report that the Auditor General just released yesterday. It is entitled “ Report 5—Chronic Homelessness”.
The situation is that the government does not know what is going on, and it does not even know if it is meeting the needs of those who are homeless. This is from the Auditor General. The Auditor General also indicated that the government is not going to meet its own targets. This is not just me talking. This is the reality from the Auditor General, who is bringing this issue to the government's attention.
We are approaching another cold, wet season. It just snowed outside in Ottawa. It snowed in Vancouver last week. There have been enough excuses and enough talking points. People are dying on the streets. Housing is a basic human right. Let us get on with it. The Liberal government needs to do its job and build the housing to house people so they can have a roof over their head and safe place to call home.
181 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:06:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to pick up on something the member just mentioned, and she mentioned it in her first intervention as well.
When we enacted the legislation that furthers the national housing strategy two Parliaments ago, in the 42nd Parliament, we enshrined housing as a human right. Again, that is a critical component of our government's prioritization of housing. Also, there is agreement on the idea of removing profiteering from the housing sector and stopping the treatment of it as a commodity.
The Auditor General's report is an important report, as is the initiative we have taken to end homelessness and set targets. Meeting those targets is a priority for our government. We will review that report and respond to it accordingly. We have continued to prioritize housing throughout our mandate. We have a plan to keep it that way. We expanded the rapid housing initiative because we believe a safe and affordable place to call home is the right of every Canadian.
166 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:07:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in my question on September 28, I pointed out to the government that in Restaurants Canada's annual report, over the last 12 months 43% more restaurants had closed than opened. Additionally, the Business Development Bank of Canada and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada report that our nation’s small and medium-sized enterprises, or SMEs, are responsible for 10 million jobs in our country.
Like all SMEs, restaurants help to employ 88.3% of Canada’s private labour force. However, all is far from well. In August 2022, for the first time in history, there were over 180,000 client visits in one month to the Daily Bread Food Bank in Toronto.
In prepandemic times, just to put it in context, it would have had 60,000 client visits. If we fast-forward to January 2022, with the increases in inflation, there were 120,000 visits and, as mentioned earlier, in the most recent reported figure in August, that number has tripled, from 60,000 prepandemic to 180,000 client visits in one month.
There is serious hardship here. Many Canadians face a really harsh winter. This reality is not some partisan thing; it is a very serious situation. It is one thing for a senior minister to suggest that it is not going to be an easy time for Canadians, that it is not going to be an easy time for Canada and that we have to make do with today’s realities.
Does the government have any other viable plan, and if so, what is it?
265 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:09:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let me outline some of the measures that we are taking to address supports for restaurants and the tourism industry and in terms of addressing the inflation that is affecting all Canadians, including people outside Canada. It is, indeed, a global phenomenon.
We know that Canadians and Canadian businesses, along with those in countries around the world, are dealing with inflationary pressures and increasing interest rates. Things like high oil prices and global supply chain disruptions are leading to a scarcity of goods and to rising prices. Those are a serious concern for the member who raised this question, and they are a serious concern for the government.
We also understand the important role that restaurants play in communities from coast to coast to coast. In fact, we were there to support them through the pandemic and provided direct support to the hospitality and tourism industry. During the past two and a half years, our government introduced financial support for employees' wages, subsidies for rent, and loans to provide liquidity relief to ensure businesses' survival through the recovery period.
We took those actions because small businesses are indeed the heart of Canadian communities and the engine of Canada's economy. This was highlighted by the member for Spadina—Fort York. Small businesses contribute 55% of Canada's GDP and employ 10.8 million Canadians across the country. That is an astounding number, and that is why they deserve our support.
What budget 2022 outlined was a range of incentives to help small businesses remain strong through the economic uncertainty that was highlighted by the member who raised this question. We have cut the small business tax rate from 11% to 9%, which is essential to support businesses coming out of the pandemic. We are working to deliver lower credit card fees to reduce this burden on small businesses. We have stated quite clearly in the fall economic statement that if a negotiated solution is not reached, we will table legislation to regulate that sector and regulate those fees. We have also enhanced the small business financing program by increasing annual financing to small businesses by an estimated annual $560 million, helping businesses and their owners access liquidity for start-up costs and intangible assets.
Tourism is very vibrant in the riding of Spadina—Fort York. I know this quite well as the member for the riding just adjacent to Spadina—Fort York. We know that virtually all tourism businesses are small businesses themselves, and those tourism businesses employ two million people across this country. Hospitality and tourism is an inclusive industry that provides jobs and opportunities to newcomers, women, youth and indigenous people. These are specific groups that have experienced some of the worst impacts of the global pandemic.
We have been supporting these businesses in their efforts to strive for even greater inclusivity, with things like the women entrepreneurship program, the Black entrepreneurship program, and targeted supports for indigenous businesses. Returning to budget 2022, we outlined a proposal for $20 million over two years to support a new indigenous tourism fund to help indigenous tourism recover from the pandemic and position itself for long-term sustainable growth.
We also announced a commitment to develop a new federal tourism growth strategy focused on recovery and civility and growth in the long term. To further spur the recovery, jobs and growth of small businesses, we have launched the Canada digital adoption program. CDAP is a $4-billion program that will help restaurants grow their online presence and boost online ordering. These are targeted supports to help the small businesses that the member for Spadina—Fort York is outlining.
613 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:13:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have two questions.
One, does my hon. colleague believe that the government should be instituting a comprehensive plan to help Canadians cope with the record food costs and the high interest rates?
Two, given how there are other metrics that lag, I would suggest that food bank usage is as close to a real-time indicator that really demonstrates or illustrates, quite frankly, how Canadians are doing, particularly those who are most vulnerable. It should be monitored and used to inform public policy. Would my hon. colleague agree that food bank usage is a metric the government should begin monitoring?
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:14:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in terms of responding directly to the member, I think that a comprehensive plan is under way. We see that through efforts we are taking not only to assist small businesses but also to assist Canadians with their daily costs.
The member and I have ridings in the province of Ontario. We heard today that 90% of the child care centres have signed on to our child care plan. This means that families in his riding and mine would be benefiting from a 25% rebate for the early part of the year and a 50% reduction by the end of the year, in terms of child care costs.
We voted on a GST rebate, which will help 11 million Canadians deal with the rising costs of food.
Is food bank usage an important metric? Absolutely, it is. We cannot turn away from the rising costs of groceries and the impact that is having on Canadians.
What we are doing through targeted measures such as the GST rebate, such as the housing benefit and such as dental care for young people is providing relief to those who need it the most, along with the supports for small businesses that I outlined earlier.
203 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:15:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on June 3, I asked the Minister of Natural Resources a question about Canada's role in providing the world with energy solutions. I pointed out the government's failures in having Canadian resources delivered to world markets. My question was one about long-term impact, the result of the government's constrictive policies on Canadian resource development and delivery to world markets, and Canada's role in providing the world with energy security.
The minister told me I was wrong, that I was wrong in pointing out that hundreds of billions of dollars of investment projects have left this country since the government was elected. He said I was wrong that government-funded delays on resource development projects have left Canada with a reputation as an unreliable place to invest. He said I was wrong in indicating that their flagship Impact Assessment Act, the famous Bill C-69, has led to more uncertainty in the process of having projects approved. He said I was wrong in protesting the constraints on Canada's signature contribution to reducing worldwide CO2 emissions by exporting the world's cleanest natural gas to world markets and, in the process, displacing coal burning for electricity production in the developing world. He said I was wrong in actively working to get Canadian resources to world markets like Germany, which were thrust into the arms of Russia, as it filled the void left by Canada these past seven years. This led to a transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth from democratic countries to authoritarian regimes, the most problematic, of course, being the funds that flow to Russia to wage war against our friends in Ukraine.
The government has made this bed and now it is saying that it would take too long for Canada to provide solutions to the obvious problem.
Well, I am not wrong.
The government has failed the world by constraining clean Canadian energy development for the past seven years. It has failed the developing world in providing clean Canadian energy to a growing world demanding more energy. It has failed the environment by keeping Canadian natural gas from markets that have had to burn more coal and emit more CO2. It has failed the democratic nations around the world by forcing them to source their energy at great expense from the world's most authoritarian regimes. We should have developed these resources for the world seven years ago. It is true. These are great policy failures for Canada and for the world.
The best time to move forward was seven years ago, then six years ago, then five years ago, then four years ago, then three years ago. The best time to move forward is right now. Let us get these things off the building blocks and let us get some things going in Canada.
Let us talk about the supply disruptions. I know one of the excuses I am going to hear is that these are global supply disruptions. Well, who is causing the global supply disruptions? It is Canada. We cannot get projects built.
On inflation, if we think about the mounting cost of energy around the world, it is because Canada has not been there to provide energy to a growing world. This past summer alone, energy was $60 per thousand cubic feet in Europe and $10 per thousand cubic feet in the United States. That is a big difference. It was worth negative at times in Canada.
We have to get our resources to market.
591 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:19:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am going to start off with some general responses to what the member opposite has raised and then go into some specific details.
First, in terms of investment not having occurred in the last seven years, that is categorically incorrect. The largest foreign investment in Canadian history was actually in the Kitimat facility to develop liquefied natural gas to address clients in Asia, particularly for the transition off coal in India and China. That is a $40-billion investment in the province of British Columbia and it was widely supported in the House.
Second, in terms of assisting our allies, I am sure the member opposite, who is a wise individual and contributes well to the debates in this chamber, knows about the $2.6-billion hydrogen energy deal that was struck with our German allies as recently as about a month and a half ago. The proposed site of the project is off the coast of Newfoundland. There is also intense activity on hydrogen and hydrogen cell technology in the member's own province of Alberta, which I am sure he is quite familiar with.
Further to that, we are developing a critical minerals strategy, which has a $4-billion funding investment attached to it. That is to meet the growing need for batteries for vehicles and transportation. These batteries will effectively provide an energy source for vehicles not only on this continent but clearly around the world.
Lastly, although this is a source of dispute between our two parties, we are not going to apologize, nor should we ever, for the fact that energy projects, energy investments and issues that relate to getting Canadian energy abroad always need to go through an important regulatory permitting requirement, which relates to the Impact Assessment Agency. That program is focused on environmental sustainability and indigenous reconciliation. Those are two things that no one should need to apologize for, and they are important priorities for our country, as they should be.
With respect to what we are doing, as the member opposite predicted, I am going to talk about the fact that this is a global problem. I am going to talk about the fact that what we are facing is instability as a result of a pandemic. This is coupled with the fact that we have Russia's illegal and barbaric invasion of Ukraine, which is destabilizing Europe and our European allies.
We are there to support our European allies. That is critical. We will continue to support our European allies with good, clean Canadian energy. We are always willing to entertain projects that meet our permitting process, that meet our sustainability requirements and that meet our ambitious targets, which are being discussed as we speak at COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh because they are very, very important.
With respect to what has been happening in Europe, we need to understand the impact that Russia's invasion of Ukraine has had on Ukrainians themselves, thousands of whom have been killed or wounded. We must also understand that we have been working consistently on energy projects and a number of other projects to assist our allies and have been working in conjunction with our American partners. That includes sanctions, aid and the encouragement of Ukrainians vis-à-vis the Ukrainian diaspora here. The member opposite would also know, which I am sure he appreciates, that to meet some of those needs, we have increased our oil and gas exports this year by the equivalent of 300,000 barrels per day. That is a direct attempt to meet some of the energy needs that are required by our allies.
It is also important to note that this unjustified invasion has been a wake-up call to the world that countries need to move away from the authoritarian actors the member mentioned and move toward more stable sources and locations of energy. Canada is ready, willing and able to meet those needs, but we will meet them in an environmentally sustainable manner that also addresses indigenous reconciliation.
676 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:22:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's saying those words, but those are just words. I would say again that he is making some of that stuff up, as so many of the members on the other side of the House do.
As to the actual facts around LNG development in Canada, we had 18 projects on the west coast and seven on the east coast to develop LNG in this country. Now we have one being developed, with three more that potentially might get developed. It is seven years later, and in the interim the United States has seven fully developed projects and is exporting to the world, and 20 more are in the process of being approved. We are a laggard. We have punished the world by not getting our environmental solutions to the world. We are also a better producer of this resource.
Any feigned attempt to pretend that we are actually moving forward, from the government's perspective, on a project that was approved long before the member's government got into office and has taken this long to get to development, is pretense, and I need to call it out for what it is.
I have lots more to say, but I know my time is limited.
212 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:23:57 p.m.
- Watch
Unsurprisingly, Madam Speaker, we have a strong difference of opinion on this side of the House. One is not making stuff up. I do not do that personally, and the government does not do that as a matter of course.
What I am talking about is investments that are being made in energy in this country, and investments that are being made toward sustainable, green and cleaner energy. Those include things like renewables: solar, wind and geothermal energy. Those include even initiatives to export Canadian know-how in nuclear technology around the planet.
The member, in his first intervention, talked about the unfortunate situation in which the Germans were burning coal. That is a very unfortunate situation. I would point out to the member that Germany's reliance on coal comes in part from having been overly reliant on Russian natural gas, and secondly from having turned its back on its own nuclear program.
That is not something we have done in Ontario. Our phase-out of coal was propelled by our substantive nuclear assets in the province of Ontario. That is what we are hoping to do with the rest of the country in terms of the phase-out of coal in places like Alberta and New Brunswick. That is what we will continue to do with our European allies to meet their energy needs.
226 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:24:58 p.m.
- Watch
The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 7:25 p.m.)
41 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
